EXCHANGE 


■' 


DOCUMENTS 


OF   THE 


Constitutional  Convention 

OF   THE 

STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

1915 

Begun  and  Held  at  the  Capitol  in  the  City  of  Albany 
on  Tuesday  the  Sixth  Day  of  April 


ALBANY 

J.   B.   LYON  COMPANY,   PRINTERS 

1913 


-%  »  »  ».•  a 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  1 


COMMITTEE    ASSIGNMENTS 


1.  Bill  of  Eights— Mr.  .Marshall,  Chairman.  Mr.  Reeves,  Mr. 
Olcott,  Mr.  Schurman,  Mr.  Vaiiderlvn,  Mr.  Bunce,  Mr.  Curran, 
Mr.  Morgan  J.  O'Brien,  Mr.  Weed,  Mr.  F.  Martin,  Mr.  O'Connor. 

2.  The  Legislature,  its  Organization,  etc. —  Mr.  Brackett,  Chair- 
man. Mr.  M.  Saxe,  .Air.  Quigg,  Mr.  Lindsay,  Mr.  Aiken,  Mr.  R. 
B.  Smith,  Mr.  Ford,  Mr.  Kirby,  Mr.  Linde,  Mr.  Buxbaum,  Mr. 
Dennis,  Mr.  Tierney,  Mr.  A.  E.  Smith,  Mr.  Ahearn,  Mr.  Haffen, 
Mr.  Bernstein,  Mr.  Burkan. 

3.  Legislative  Powers  —  Mr.  Barnes,  Chairman.  Mr.  Jesse 
Phillips,  Mr.  Schurman,  Mr.  Wadsworth,  Mr.  Brackett,  Mr. 
Oh-ott,  Mr.  Tanner,  Mr.  Hinman,  Mr.  Bockes,  Mr.  Wheeler,  Mr. 
Tuck,  Mr.  L.  M.  Martin,  Mr.  Sheehan,  Mr.  J.  G.  Saxe,  Mr. 
Foley,  Mr.  A.  E.  Smith,  Mr.  Ahearn. 

4.  Suffrage— Mr.  Cullman,  Chairman.  Mr.  Stowell,  Mr. 
Waterman,  Mr.  Xye.  Mr.  Owen.  Air.  Eggleston,  Mr.  C.  J.  White, 
Mr.  Mealy,  Mr.  Baumes,  Mr.  R.  E.  Weber,  Mr.  Williams,  Mr. 
J.  Gr.  Saxe,  Mr.  Dooling,  Mr.  Newburger,  Mr.  Frank,  Mr.  Eisner, 
Mr.  Kirk. 

5.  Governor  and  Other  State  Officers,  etc. —  Mr.  Tanner.  Chair- 
man.    Mr.  Rhees,  Mr.  E.  JST.  Smith,  Mr.  Stimson,  Mr.  Cullinan, 


331927 


Doc.  No.   1  2 

Mr.  Hale,  Mr.  Franchot,  Mr.  Bockes,  Mr.  ('.  Nicoll,  Mr.  Pel- 
letrean,.->iV;  in-c  il.  .'!••.  ':;/,''•,  Mr.  Blauvelt,  Mr.  Dykman,  Mr. 
Baldwin,   Mr.  F.   Martin.  Mr.  Donnelly. 

6.  Judiciary  —  Mr.  Wickersham,  Chairman.  Mr.  Brackett, 
Mr.  Marshall,  Mr.  Gladding.  Mr.  Stimson,  Mr.  Clearwater,  Mr. 
Kodenbeek,  Mr.  Dunmore,  Mr.  Steinbrink,  Mr.  C.  H.  Young, 
Mr.  Sears,  Mr.  Cobb,  Mr.  Delaneey  Nicoll,  Mr.  Stanchfield, 
Mr.  Skeehan,  Mr.  Dykman,  Mr.  Wagner. 

7.  On  the  State  Finances,  Revenues  and  Expenditures — Mr. 
Stimson,  Chairman.  Mr.  llinman,  Mr.  Low,  Mr.  Pelletreau, 
Mr.  Parsons,  Mr.  Lincoln,  Mr.  Lennox,  Mr.  Van  Ness,  Mr. 
Austin,  Mr.  Beach,  Mr.  Bannister,  Mr.  Dick.  Mr.  Wagner,  Mr. 
Potter,  Mr.   Stanchfield,   Mr.    Delaneey   Nicoll,  Mr.   Slevin. 

8.  Cities  — Mr.  Low,  Chairman.  "Sir.  John  Lord  O'Brian,  Mr. 
Berri,  Mr.  Fobes,  Mr.  E.  X.  Smith,  Mr.  Latson,  Mr.  Green. 
Mr.  Wiggins,  Mr.  Franchot,  Mr.  V.  M.  Allen,  Mr.  Sanders,  Mr. 
C.  Nicoll,  Air.  Foley,  Air.  T.  V.  Smith,  Air.  Baldwin,  Air.  aTeed, 
Mr.  Shipman. 

9.  Canals — Mr.  Clinton,  Chairman.  Mr.  Cullinan,  Mr. 
Landreth,  Mr.  Tuck,  Mr.  Lindsay,  Mr.  Wiggins,  Mr.  B.  B.  Smith, 
Mr.   Green,   Mr.   Fogarty,   Mr.   Griffin,   Mr.    O'Connor. 

10.  Public  Utilities— Air.  Hale,  Chairman.  .Air.  Olcott,  Mr. 
Westwood,  Mr.  Brenner,  Mr.  Mandeville,  Mr.  Deyo,  Mr.  Beeves, 
Mr.  Nye,  Mr.  Sanders,  Mr.  Fancher,  Mr.  Kirov,  Mr.  Mathewson, 
Mr.  McLean,  Mr.  Potter,  Mr.  Blauvelt,  Mr.  Foley,  Mr.  Dooling. 

11.  Counties,  Towns  and  Villages,  their  Organization,  Government, 
etc. —  Mr.  John  Lord  O'Brian,  Chairman.  Air.  Sharpe,  Mr. 
Coles,  Mr.  F.  L.  Young,  Mr.  Quigg,  Mr.  Parmenter,  Mr.  Vander- 
lyn,  Mr.  Johnson,  Mr.  Heaton,  Mr.  Betts,  Air.  Lincoln,  Mr.  L.  M. 
Martin,  Air.  Slevin,  Mr.  Donnelly,  Air'.  C.  A.  Webber,  Mr.  Schoon- 
hut,  Mr.  Eppig. 

12.  County,  Town  and  Village  Officers — Air.  Mereness,  Chair- 
man. Air.  Tuck,  Air.  Ryder,  Air.  Rosch,  Air.  Standart,  Air. 
GrefT,  Mr.  Ford.  Mr.  Barrett,  Mr.  Linde,  Mr.  Parker,  Mr.  Bux- 
banm.  Air.  Haffen,  Air.  Daly,  Air.  Wafer,  Mr.  Endres,  Air.  Bern- 
stein, Mr.  J.  J.  White. 

13.  Prisons,  etc.,  and  the  Prevention  and  Punishment  of  Crime  — 
Mr.  Clearwater,  Chairman.  Mr.  Ostrander,  Mr.  McKinney,  Al  r. 
Owen,  Mr.  Bell,  Mr.  Winslow,  Air.  Adams.  "Mr.  Drummond,  Air. 
Leitner,  Mr.  Daly,  Mr.  Earowitz. 


3  Doc.  Xo.  1 

14.  Corporations — Mr.  Brenner,  ('/minium.  Mr.  Fancher,  Mr. 
McKean,  Mr.  Wood,  Mr.  Doughty,  Mr.  Gladding,  Mr.  Bunce,  Mr. 
Adams,  Mr.  Rosch,  Mr.  Jones,  Mr.  Williams,  Mr.  Law,  Mr.  Frank. 
Mr.  Kirk,  Mr.  Mann,  Mr.  Donovan,  Mr.  lleyman. 

15.  Banking  and  Insurance  —  Mr.  Fobes,  Chairman.  Mr. 
Beach,  Mr.  Jesse  Phillips,  Mr.  Wheeler,  Mr.  Leggett,  Mr.  Van 
Ness,  Mr.  McKean,  Mr.  Richards,  Mr.  Mulry,  Mr.  Ryan,  Mr. 
Harowitz. 

16.  Militia  and  Military  Affairs — Mr.  Latson,  Chairman.  Mr. 
Westwood,  Mr.  Dennis,  Mr.  Parker,  Mr.  McLean,  Mr.  Griffin,  Mr. 
Byrne. 

17.  Education  —  Mr.  Schnrman,  Chairman.  Mr.  Clearwater, 
Mr.  Vanderlyn,  Mr.  Sargent,  Mr.  S.  K.  Phillips,  Mr.  Mandeville, 
Mr.  Ryder,  Mr.  Mealy,  Mr.  Lennox,  Mr.  Law,  Mr.  Baumes,  Mr. 
Mr  Kinney,  Mr.  Shipman,  Mr.  Potter,  Mr.  Ward,  Mr.  J.  J.  White. 
Mr.  Donovan. 

18.  Charities — Mr.  Wadsworth,  Chairman.  Mr.  Stowell,  Mr. 
Waterman,  Mr.  Parmenter,  Mr.  Johnson,  Mr.  Wiggins,  Mr. 
Doughty,  Mr.  Wood,  Mr.  Sargent,  Mr.  Bell,  Mr.  F.  C.  Allen,  Mr. 
Mulry,  Mr.  Leitner,  Mr.  Drummond,  Mr.  T.  F.  Smith,  Mr.  New- 
burger,  Mr.  Eisner. 

19.  Industrial  Interests  and  Relations  —  Mr.  Parsons,  Chairman. 
Mr.  Low,  Mr.  Curran,  Mr.  Berri,  Mr.  Parmenter,  Mr.  Franchot, 
Mr.  Mandeville,  Mr.  Eggleston,  Mr.  C.  ISTicoll,  Mr.  Jones,  Mr. 
Leggett,  Mr.  R.  E.  Weber,  Mr.  O'Connor,  Mr.  A.  E.  Smith,  Mr. 
Fogarty,  Mr.  Dahm,  Mr.  linger. 

20.  Conservation  of  Natural  Resources  —  Mr.  Dow,  Chairtnan. 
Mr.  E.  X.  Smith,  Mr.  Clinton,  "Mr.  Marshall,  Mr.  Whipple,  Mr. 
Rhees,  Mr.  Landreth,  Mr.  Meigs,  Mr.  Austin,  Mr.  Bannister,  Mr. 
Angell,  Mr.  Dunlap,  Mr.  Baldwin,  Mr.  Morgan  J.  O'Brien,  .Mr. 
Leary,  Mr.  Blauvelt,  Mr.  J.  G.  Saxe. 

21.  Relations  to  the  Indians — Mr.  Lindsay,  Chairman.  Mr. 
Whipple.  Mr.  Meigs,  Mr.  R.  B.  Smith,  Mr.  Shipman,  Mr. 
Schoonirut,  Mr.  Endres. 

22.  Future  Amendments  and  Revisions  of  the  Constitution  —  Mr. 
Hinnum.  Chairman.  Mr.  F.  L.  Young,  Mr.  Sharpe,  Mr.  Heaton. 
Mr.  C.  J.  White,  Mr.  F.  Martin,  Mr.  Ward. 

23.  Revision  and  Engrossment — Mr.  Rodenbeek,  Chairman. 
Mr.  Quigg,  Mr.  Ostrander,  Mr.  Betts,  Mr.  Bayes,  Mr.  New- 
burger,  Mr.  Leary. 


Doc.  X<>.  1  4 

24.  Privileges  and  Elections  —  Mr.  C.  II.  Young,  Chairman. 
Mr.  Brenner,  Mr.  Buiice,  Mr.  Cobb,  Mr.  Dimlap,  Mr.  F.  C. 
Allen,  Mr.  Tieraey,  Mr.  Richards,  Mr.  Burkan,  Mr.  Herman, 
Mr.  Byrne. 

25.  Printing— ]\Jr.  Berri,  Chairman.  Mr.  Betts,  Mr.  Nixon, 
Mr.  Mereness,  Mr.  Beach,  Mr.  McLean,  Mr.  Dahm. 

26.  Contingent  Expenses  — Mr.  S.  K.  Phillips,  Chairman.  Mr. 
Fobes,  Mr.  Sears,  Mr.  Sharpe,  Mr.  Bell,  Mr.  Mnlry,  Mr.  Dyknian. 

27.  Rules  — Mr.  John  Lord  O'Brian,  Chairman.  Mr.  Hale, 
Mr.  Barnes,  Mr.  Parsons,  Mr.  Delancey  JSTicoll,  Mr.  Sheehan,  Mr. 
Wagner. 

28.  Civil  Service— Mr.  Rhees,  Chairman.  Mr.  S.  K.  Phillips, 
Mr.  Wickersham,  Mr.  Dow,  Mr.  Dimmore,  Mr.  Deyo,  Mr.  Xixon, 
Mr.  Dick,  Mr.  Coles,  Mr.  McKean,  Mr.  Aiken,  Mr.  Winslow,  Mr. 
Weed,  Mr.  Richards,  Mr.  linger,  Mr.  Eisner,  Mr.  Mann. 

29.  Library  and  Information  —  Mr.  Jesse  Phillips,  Chairman. 
Mr.  Wickersham,  Mr.  Rodenbeck,  Mr.  Wood,  Mr.  Morgan  J. 
O'Brien,  Mr.  Stanchfield,  Mr.  Leitner. 

30.  Taxation  — Mr.  Martin  Saxe,  Chairman.  Mr.  Ostrander, 
Mr.  Steinbrink,  Mr.  Greff,  Mr.  Nixon,  Mr.  McKinney,  Mr.  Leg- 
gett,  .Air.  Standart,  Mr.  Ryder,  Mr.  Barrett,  Mr.  Mathewson,  Mr. 
V.  M.  Allen,  Mr.  linger,  Mr.  Ryan,  Mr.  Eppig,  Mr.  C.  A.  Web- 
ber, Mr.  Wafer. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 


No.  2 


NAMES  AND  POST-OFFICE  ADDRESSES  OF  DELEGATES 
TO  CONSTITUTIONAL  CONVENTION 


DELEGATES-AT-LARGE 

Name  P.  0.  Address 

Berri,  William 465  Clinton  Ave.,  Brooklyn. 

Brackett,  Edgar  Truman.  Saratoga  Spa,  N.  Y. 

Brenner,  Jacob 252  Carroll  St.,  Brooklyn. 

Clearwater,  Alphonso  P.  Kingston,  N.  Y. 

Cullman,  Patrick  W.  .  .  .  Oswego,  X.  Y. 

Low,  Seth 30  E.  64th  St.,  I\Tew  York  City. 

Marshall,    Louis 47  E.  72d  St.,  New  York  City. 

O'Brian,  John  Lord Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

Parsons,    Herbert 115  E.  72d  St.,  New  York  City. 

Rodenbeck,   Adolph  J .  .  .  Rochester,  N.  Y. 

Root,   Elihu 1  E.  81st  St.,  New  York  City. 

Schurman,  Jacob  Gould. .  Ithaca,  N.  Y. 

Stimson,  Henry  L 275  Lexington  Ave.,  New  York  City 

Wickersham,  George  W. .  Cedarhurst,  L.  I. 

Young,  Charles  H New  Rochelle,  N.  Y. 


Doc.  Xo.  2  mi  2 

DISTRICT  DELEGATES 

First  Senate  District 
Name  P.  0.  Address 

Pelletreau,  Robert  S .  .  .  .    Patchogue,  X.  Y. 

Coles,  Franklin  A Glen  Cove,  X.  Y. 

McKinney,  William  M.  ..    Xorthport,  X.  Y. 

Second  Senate  District 

Frank,    Philip Bridge  Plaza,  Long  Island  City. 

Ryan,  George  J 236  Lincoln  St.,  Flushing,  L.  I. 

Weed,  John  W 61  Sanford  Ave.,  Flushing,  L.  I. 

Third  Senate  District 

McLean,  Andrew 2S4  Carlton  Ave.,  Brooklyn,  X.  Y. 

Webber,    Charles  A 172  Congress  St.,  Brooklyn,  X.  Y. 

Wafer,  Moses  J 319  Clinton  St.,  Brooklyn,  X.  Y. 

Fourth  Senate  District 

Adams,  Floyd  J 88  Ross  St.,  Brooklyn,  X.  Y. 

Weber,  Richard  E 46  Sumner  Ave.,  Brooklyn,  X.  Y. 

Buxbaum,    Isidor 266  Van  Buren  St.,  Brooklyn.  X.  Y. 

Fifth  Senate  District 

Dahm,  James  H 462  55th  St.,  Brooklyn,  X.  Y. 

Lyme,  Edward  J 28  Eighth  Ave.,  Brooklyn,  X.  Y. 

Daly.    Michael 312    Prospect    Park   West,    Brooklyn, 

X.  V. 

Sixth  Senate  District 

Reeves,  Alfred  G 148  St.  John's  Place,  Brooklyn,  X.  Y. 

Steinbrink,    Meier is  Fuller  Place,  Brooklyn,  X.  Y. 

Bannister,   William   P...  L09  Cambridge  PL,  Brooklyn,  XT.  Y. 

Seventh    Senate   District 

Pogarty,    Michael L19  Russell  St.,  Brooklyn,  X  V. 

Ward,   Francis  P 436  Humboldt  St,  Brooklyn,  X.  Y. 

Dykman,  William  -X....     171      Washington      Park.      Brooklyn, 
X.  Y. 


3  Doc.  No.  2 

Eighth  Senate  District 
Name  P.  0.  Address 

Bayes,  William  R 1551  East  10th  St.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

Latson,   Almet  R 250  Jefferson  Ave.,  Brooklyn,  N".  Y. 

Doughty,  Edgar  M 131  Lennox  Row,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

Ninth  Senate  District 

Eppig,   Theodore  C 28  Linden  St.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

.Mann,    Frank 02  Suydam  St.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

Heymau,  Harry 321  Lorimer  St.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

Tenth  Senate  District 

Sargent,   Isaac 914  Herkimer  St.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

Mathewson,  William  F.  .    41  Granite  St.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 
Linde,  Joseph 220  Linden  St.,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

Eleventh  Senate  District 

Ahearn,  John  F 290  E.  Broadway,  New  York  City. 

Smith,  Alfred  E 25  Oliver  St.,  New  York  City. 

Harawitz,  Abraham 110  Forsyth  St.,  New  York  City. 

Twelfth   Senate  District 

White,  John  J 219  E.  12th  St.,  New  York  City. 

O'Brien,  Morgan  J 729  Park  Ave.,  New  York  City. 

Newburger,  Harry  W.  .  .    17  Livingston  PL,  New  York  City. 

Thirteenth  Senate  District 
Drnmmond,  Michael  J.  ..    435  Riverside  Drive,  New  York  City. 

Stanchfield,  John  B Hotel  Yanderbilt,  New  York  City. 

Baldwin,  Arthur  J 35  Fifth  Ave.,  New  York  City. 

Fourteenth  Senate  District 

Foley,  James  A 816  East  18th  St.,  New  York  City. 

Nicoll,    Delancey 23  East  39th  St.,  New  York  City. 

Kirk,  Hiram  M 136  East  49th  St.,  New  York  City. 

Fifteenth  Senate  District 

Smith,    Thomas   F 880  West  End  Ave.,  New  York  City. 

Sheehan,  William  F 16  East  56th  St.,  New  York  City. 

Mulry,  Thomas  M 10  Perry  St.,  New  York  City. 


Doc.  No.  2  4 

Sixteenth  Senate  District 

Name  P.  0.  Address 

Wagner,  Robert  F 244  East  86th  St.,  New  York  City. 

Dooling,  John  T 179  East  80th  St.,  New  York  ( 'ity. 

Saxe,  John  G 106  West  72d  St.,  New  York  City. 

Seventeenth  Senate  District 

Tanner,  Frederick  C.  .  .  .    12  Gramercy  Park,  New  York  City. 

Nicoll,    Courtlandt 405  Park  Ave.,  New  York  City. 

Bell,   Gordon  Knox 58  East  72d  St.,  New  York  City. 

Eighteenth  Senate  District 

Eisner,    Mark 243  West  98th  St.,  New  York  City. 

Olcott,  William  M.  K .  .    58  West  84th  St.,  New  York  City. 
Saxe,    Martin 313  West  82d  St.,  New  York  City. 

Nineteenth  Senate  District 

Shipman,  Andrew  J.  .  .  .    636  West  158th  St.,  N-e\v  York  City. 
Bernstein,  J.  Sidney.  .  .  .    1980  Seventh  Ave.,  New  York  City. 
Unger,  Albert  Blogg 139  West  130th  St.,  New  York  City. 

Twentieth  Senate  District 

Leary,  Timothy  A 144  East  89th  St.,  New  York  City. 

Burkan,  Nathan 25  East  99th  St.,  New  York  City. 

Potter,  Mark  W 417  Riverside  Drive,  New  York  City. 

Twenty-first  Senate  District 

Donovan,  Peter 465  East  144th  St.,  Bronx,  New  York 

City. 
Donnelly,   James  F 1432   Glover   St.,   Bronx,   New   York 

City. 
Slevin,  William  F 30  East  130th  St..  New  York  City. 

Twenty-second  Senate  I  >isteict 

Martin,    Francis 2150    University    Ave.,    Bronx,    Now 

York  City. 
Hafl'eii,  Louis  J 30S  East  L62d  St.,  Bronx,  New  York 

City. 
Griffin,  Anthony  J 891  Cauldvvell  Ave.,  New  York  City. 


5  Doc.  No.  2 

Twenty-third  Senate  District 
Name  P.  0.  Address 

Blauvelt,   George  A Mousey,  X.  Y. 

Leitner,  George  A Nyack,  N".  Y. 

Richards,  Eugene  Lamb.    Prospect  Ave.,  New  Brighton,   X.  Y. 

TWENTY-FOURTH    SENATE    DISTRICT 

Winslow,  Francis  A Yonkers,  N.  Y. 

Young,  Frank  L Ossining,  1ST.  Y. 

Barrett,   Henry   B White  Plains,  N".  Y. 

Twenty-fifth  Senate  District 

Baumes,  Caleb  H 67  Farrington  St.,  Newburgh,  N.  Y. 

Wiggins,  Russell Aliddletown,  N.   Y. 

Rosch,  Joseph Liberty,  N.  Y. 

Twenty-sixth   Senate   District 

i'hillips,  Samuel  K Beacon,  N.  Y. 

Ryder,    Clayton Carman,  N.  Y. 

Quigg,    Lemuel    E Austerlitz,  N.  Y. 


Twenty-seventh  Senate  Dis 


I'KR'T 


Sliarpe,  Severyn  J] Albany  Ave.,  Kingston,  N.  Y. 

\  anderlyn,  John  N Xew  Paltz,  N.  Y. 

Austin.    H.    Leroy Catskill,  N.  Y. 

Twenty-eighth  Senate  District 

Barnes,  William Guilderland,  N.  Y. 

Hinman,  Harold  J Albany,  X.  Y. 

Mealy,   Edward  A Cohoes,  N.  Y. 

Twenty-ninth    Senate   District 

lleaton,  Willis  E Hoosick  Falls,  1ST.  Y. 

Allen,  Victor  M Petersburgh,  N.  Y. 

McKean,   Andrew   P.  .  .  .    Troy,  N".  Y. 


Doc.  Xo.  2  6 

Thirtieth  Senate  District 
Name  P.  0.  Address 

Law,  Robert  R Cambridge,  X.  Y. 

Ostrander,    William  S.  .  .    Sehuylerville,  X.  Y. 
Dennis,  Otis  A Whitehall,  X.  Y. 

Thirty-first    Senate   District 
Landreth,  Olin  Henry.  .  .    College  Grounds,  Schenectady. 
Van  Xess,   Seward  H .  .  .    Cobleskill,  X.  Y. 
Danlap,  W.   Barlow 149  Market  St.,  Amsterdam,  X.  Y. 

Thirty-second  Senate  District 

'  Mince,  George  H Herkimer,  X.  Y. 

Williams,  Perry  G Lowville,  XT.  Y. 

Mereness,    Charles  S....    Lowville,  X.  Y. 

Thirty-third   Senate  District 

Angell,  Edward  M 245  Glen  St.,  Glens  Falls,  XL  Y. 

Owen,   Harry  E Port  Henry,  XL  Y. 

Tierney,    Patrick   J 28  Couch  St.,  Pittsburgh,  XL  Y. 

Thirty-fourth  Senate  District 

Meigs,  Ferris  J Tupper  Lake,  X.  Y. 

Waterman,  Robert  S.  .  .  .    36  Green  St.,  Ogdensburg,  XL  Y. 
Hale,   Ledyard  P Canton,  X.  Y. 

Thirty-fifth   Senate  District 

Smith,   Edward  XT 102  Clinton  St.,  Watertown,  X.  Y. 

Stowell,    Merrick 165  East  6th  St.,  Oswego,  XL  Y. 

Ford,    Lewis   H Clayton,  XL  Y. 

Thirty-sixth  Senate  District 
Dnnmore,   Watson   T.  ...    75  Rutgers  St.,  Utica,  X.  Y. 

Martin,    Louis    M L.    Clinton,  XL  Y. 

Beach,  Samuel    II 12!  W.  Dominick  St.,  Rome,  X.  Y 

Tn  liny  skvkxtii  Senate  I  Itstbict 

Bockes,  George  I Oneonta,  X.  Y. 

Gladding,   Albert    V XLorwich,  X.  Y. 

Lennox,   Frank   R Chittenango,  N.  Y. 


7  Doc.  No.  2 

Thirty-eighth  Senate  District 
Name  P.  0.  Address 

Fobes,  Alan   C 1237  James  St.,  Syracuse,  N.  Y. 

Smith;   Kay  B 1200  East  Genesee  St.,  Syracuse,  X.  Y 

( !obb,   I).  Raymond 109  College  PI.,  Syracuse,  N.  Y. 

Thirty-ninth    Senate   District 

Green,  George  E 17  Frederick  St.,  Binghamton,  N.  Y. 

Deyo,  Israel  T 32  North  St.,  Binghamton,  N.  Y. 

Fancher,  Samuel  H 83  North  St.,  Walton,  N.  Y. 

Fortieth   Senate  District 

Aiken,   E.   Clarence Owasco,  X.   Y. 

Eggleston,   Joseph   E Cortland,  N.  Y. 

Allen,   Francis  C Ovid,  N.  Y. 

Forty-first  Senate  District 

Parker,  John  M 113  Front  St.,  Owego,  N.  Y. 

Mandeville,  Hubert  C.  .  .    509  West  Church  St.,  Elmira,  N.  Y. 
Nye,    Bertrand    W 404  Madison  Ave.,  Watkins,  N.  Y. 

Forty-second  Senate  District 

Parmenter,    John Geneva,  N.  Y. 

Johnson,  John  II Penn  Yan,  N.  Y. 

Betts,   (liarles  H Lyons,  N.  Y. 

Forty-third  Senate  District 

Phillips,   Jesse   S 36  Church  St.,  Hornell,  N.  Y. 

Wadsworth,  James  W.,  Sr.    Geneseo,  N.  Y. 
Wheeler,  Monroe Bath,  N.  Y. 

Forty-fourth  Senate  District 

Leggett,  John  C Cuba,  N.  Y. 

Wood,  Frank  S 314  East  Main  St.,  Batavia,  N.  Y. 

Greff,   Clarence  H Warsaw,  N.  Y. 


Doc.  No.  2  8 

FORTY-FIFTH   SENATE  DISTRICT 
Name  P.  O.  Address 

Rhees,  Rush University    of    Rochester,    Rochester, 

F.Y. 

Jones,  Frank  N Webster,  N".  Y. 

Tuck,  Andrew  E 203  Chamber  of  Commerce  Building, 

Rochester,  N.  Y. 

Forty-sixth  Senate  District 

White,  Charles  J Lockport,  N.  Y. 

Curran,  Richard  H City  Hall,  Rochester,  N.  Y. 

Dick,  Homer  E.  A Wilder  Building,  Rochester,  N.  Y. 

Forty-seventh  Senate  District 

Franchot,  Edward  E Niagara  Falls,  N".  Y. 

Lindsay,  James  P North  Tonawanda,  N.  Y. 

Kirby,  Thomas  A Albion,  N.  Y. 

Forty-eigjitii  Senate  District 

Clinton,   George,    Sr Prudential  Building,  Buffalo,  X.  Y. 

Lincoln,  Leroy  A 523  Ellicott  Square,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

Sears,   Charles  B 810  Fidelity  Building,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

Forty-ninth   Senate  District 

Endres,  Mat 296  Strauss  St.,  Buffalo,  N".  Y. 

O'Connor,   Thomas   V.  ...    157  Mackinaw  St.,  Buffalo,  N".  Y. 
Schoonhut,  Charles 352  Williams  St.,  Buffalo,  N.  Y. 

Fiftieth   Senate  District 

Standart,   Frank  W 303  Mutual  Life  Building,  Buffalo. 

Sanders,    Harry  D 033  Marine  Bank  Building,  Buffalo. 

Nixon,  James  L 339  Washington  St.,  Buffalo. 

Fifty-first  Senate  District 

Westwood,   Herman   J.  ..     115  Central  Ave.,  Fredonia,  X.  V. 

Dow,  Charles  M 72  Allen  St.,  Jamestown,  N.  Y. 

Whipple,  James  S Salamanca,  N.  Y. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN   CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.   3 


RULES 


CHAPTER    I 
Powers  and  Duties  of  the  President  and  Vice-Presidents 

Rule  1.  The  President  shall  take  the  chair  each  day  at  the 
hour  to  which  the  Convention  shall  have  adjourned.  He  shall 
call  to  order,  and,  except  in  the  absence  of  a  quorum,  shall  proceed 
to  business  in  the  manner  prescribed  by  these  rules. 

Rule  2.  He  shall  possess  the  powers  and  perform  the  duties 
herein  prescribed,  viz. : 

1.  He  shall  preserve  order  and  decorum,  and,  in  debate,  shall 
prevent  personal  reflections,  and  confine  members  to  the  question 
under  discussion.  When  two  or  more  members  rise  at  the  same 
time,  he  shall  name  the  one  entitled  to  the  floor. 

2.  He  shall  decide  all  questions  of  order,  subject  to  appeal  to 
the  Convention.  On  every  appeal  he  shall  have  the  right,  in  his 
place,  to  assign  his  reason  for  his  decision.  In  case  of  such  appeal 
no  member  shall  speak  more  than  once. 


Doc.  No.  3  3 

3.  He  shall  appoint  all  committees,  except  where  the  Convention 
shall  otherwise  order. 

4.  He  may  substitute  any  member  to  perform  the  duties  of  the 
chair  during  the  absence  or  inability  of  both  vice-presidents,  but 
for  no  longer  period  than  two  consecutive  legislative  days,  except 
by  special  consent  of  the  Convention. 

5.  When  the  Convention  shall  be  ready  to  go  into  Committee 
of  the  Whole,  he  shall  name  a  chairman  to  preside  therein,  subject 
to  right  of  the  committee  to  elect  its  own  chairman. 

6.  He  shall  certify  the  passage  of  all  amendments  by  the  Con- 
vention, with  the  date  thereof. 

7.  He  shall  designate  the  persons  who  shall  act  as  reporters  for 
the  public  press,  not  exceeding  thirty  in  number ;  but  no  reporter 
shall  be  admitted  to  the  floor  who  is  not  an  authorized  representa- 
tive of  a  daily  paper.  Such  reporters,  so  appointed,  shall  be 
entitled  to  such  seats  as  the  President  shall  designate,  and  shall 
have  the  right  to  pass  to  and  fro  from  such  seats  in  entering  or 
leaving  the  Assembly  Chamber.  No  reporter  shall  appear  before 
any  of  the  committees  in  advocacy  of,  or  in  opposition  to,  anything 
under  consideration  before  such  committees.  A  violation  of  this 
rule  will  be  sufficient  cause  for  the  removal  of  such  reporter. 
Removal  for  this  cause  shall  be  vested  in  the  President. 

8.  He  shall  not  be  required  to  vote  in  ordinary  proceedings, 
except  where  his  vote  would  be  decisive.  In  ease  of  a  tie  vote  the 
question  shall  be  lost.  He  shall  have  general  control,  except  as 
provided  by  rule  or  law,  of  the  Assembly  Chamber  and  of  the 
corridors  and  passages  in  that  part  of  the  Capitol  assigned  to  the 
use  of  the  Convention.  In  case  of  any  disturbance  or  disorderly 
conduct  in  the  galleries,  corridors  or  passages^  he  shall  have  the 
power  to  order  the  same  to  be  cleared,  and  may  cause  any  person 
guilty  of  such  disturbance  or  disorderly  conduct  to  be  brought 
before  the  bar  of  the  Convention.  In  all  such  cases  the  members 
present  may  take  such  measures  as  they  shall  deem  necessary  to 
prevent  a  repetition  of  such  misconduct,  either  by  the  infliction  of 
censure  or  pecuniary  penalty,  as  they  may  deem  best,  on  the 
parties  thus  offending. 

9.  He  shall  also  be  ex-offlcio  member  and  chairman  of  the  <  !om- 
mittee  on  Rules. 


3  Doc.  No.  3 

10.  In  the  absence  of  the  President,  or  his  inability  to  preside, 
his  duties  shall  devolve  upon  the  First  Vice-President,  or,  if  he 
also  be  absent,  upon  the  Second  Vice-President. 

The  President  and  Vice-Presidents  shall  be  consulting  mem- 
bers, without  vote,  in  the  several  committees  to  which  they  shall 
not  have  been  specifically  appointed. 

CHAPTER  II 
Order  of  Business 
Rule  3.  The  first  business  of  each  day's  session  shall  be  the 
reading  of  the  Journal  of  the  preceding  day,  and  the  correction 
of  any  errors  that  may  be  found  to  exist  therein.  Immediately 
thereafter,  except  on  days  and  at  times  set  apart  for  the  consider- 
ation of  special  orders,  the  order  of  business  shall  be  as  follows : 

1.  Presentation  of  memorials.  Under  which  head  shall  be 
included  petitions,  remonstrances  and  communications  from  indi- 
viduals, and  from  public  bodies. 

2.  Communications  from  the  Governor  and  other  State  officers. 
Under  this  head  shall  be  embraced  also  communications  from 
public  officers  and  from  corporations  in  response  to  calls  for 
information. 

3.  Notices,  motions  and  resolutions,  to  be  called  for  by  districts, 
numerically. 

4.  Propositions  for  constitutional  amendment,  by  districts,  in 
numerical  order. 

5.  Eeports  of  standing  committees  in  the  order  stated  in  Rule 
15. 

6.  Reports  of  select  committees. 

7.  Third  reading  of  proposed  constitutional  amendments. 

8.  Unfinished  business  of  general  orders. 

9.  Special  orders. 

10.  General  orders. 

Reports  from  the  Committee  on  Revision  and  Engrossment  may 
be  received  under  any  order  of  business. 

CHAPTER   III 
Rights  and  Duties  of  Members 
Rule  4.  Petitions,   memorials,    remonstrances   and   any   other 
papers  addressed  to  the  Convention  shall  be  presented  by  the 


Doc.  No.  3  4 

President,  or  by  any  member  in  his  place,  read  by  their  titles, 
unless  otherwise  ordered,  and  referred  to  the  proper  committee. 

Rule  5.  Every  member  presenting  a  paper  shall  indorse  the 
same;  if  a  petition,  memorial,  remonstrance  or  communication  in 
answer  to  a  call  for  information,  with  a  concise  statement  of  its 
subject,  and  his  name;  if  a  notice  or  resolution,  with  his  name; 
if  a  proposition  for  constitutional  amendment,  with  a  statement 
of  its  title  and  his  name;  if  a  proposition  of  any  other  kind  for 
the  consideration  of  the  Convention,  with  a  statement  of  its 
subject,  the  proposer's  name,  and  the  reference,  if  any,  desired. 
A  report  of  a  committee  must  be  indorsed  with  a  statement  of 
such  report,  together  with  the  name  of  the  committee  making  the 
same,  and  shall  be  signed  by  the  chairman.  A  report  by  a 
minority  of  any  committee  shall  be  signed  by  the  members  ren- 
dering the  same. 

Rule  6.  Every  member  who  shall  be  within  the  bar  of  the  Con- 
vention, when  a  question  is  stated  from  the  chair,  shall  vote  thereon 
unless  he  be  excused  by  the  Convention,  or  unless  he  be  directly 
interested  in  the  question;  nor  shall  the  roll  of  absentees  be  more 
than  once  called.  The  bar  of  the  Convention  shall  be  deemed  to 
include  the  body  of  the  Convention  chamber. 

Rule  7.  Any  member  requesting  to  be  excused  from  voting  may 
make,  when  his  name  is  called,  a  brief  statement  of  the  reasons  for 
making  such  request,  not  exceeding  three  minutes  in  time,  and  the 
Convention,  without  debate,  shall  decide  if  it  will  grant  such 
request;  or  any  member  may  explain  his  vote,  for  not  exceeding 
three  minutes ;  but  nothing  in  this  rule  contained  shall  abridge  the 
right  of  any  member  to  record  his  vote  on  any  question  previous 
to  the  announcement  of  the  result. 

CHAPTER    IV 
Order  and  Decorum 

Rule  8.  No  member  rising  to  debate,  to  give  a  notice,  make  a 
motion,  or  present  a  paper  of  any  kind,  shall  proceed  until  he  shall 
have  addressed  the  President  and  been  recognized  by  him  as  en- 
titled to  the  floor.  While  the  President  is  putting  a  question  or  a 
count  is  being  had,  no  member  shall  speak  or  leave  his  place ;  and 
while  a  member  is  speaking  no  member  shall  entertain  any  private 
discourse  or  pass  between  him  and  the  Chair. 


5  Doc.  No.  3 

Rule  9.  When  a  motion  to  adjourn,  or  for  recess,  shall  be 
carried,  no  member  or  officer  shall  leave  his  place  till  the  adjourn- 
ment or  recess  shall  be  declared  by  the  President. 

Rule  10.  No  persons,  except  members  of  the  Convention  and 
officers  thereof,  shall  be  permitted  within  the  Secretary's  desk, 
or  the  rooms  set  apart  for  the  use  of  the  Secretary,  during  the 
session  of  the  Convention,  and  no  member  or  other  person  shall 
visit  or  remain  by  the  Secretary's  table  while  the  yeas  and  nays 
are  being  called,  except  officers  of  the  Convention  in  the  discharge 
of  their  duties. 

'      CHAPTER   V 
Order  of  Debate 

Rule  11.  ~No  member  shall  speak  more  than  once  on  the  same 
question  until  every  member  desiring  to  speak  on  such  question 
shall  have  spoken;  nor  more  than  twice  on  any  question  without 
leave  of  the  Convention. 

Rule  12.  If  any  member,  in  speaking,  transgress  the  rules  of 
the  Convention,  the  President  shall,  or  any  member  may,  call  to 
order,  in  which  case  the  member  so  called  to  order  shall  immedi- 
ately sit  down,  and  shall  not  rise  unless  to  explain  or  proceed 
in  order. 

Rule  13.  All  questions  relating  to  the  priority  of  one  question 
or  subject-matter  over  another,  under  the  same  order  of  business, 
the  postponement  of  any  special  order,  or  the  suspension  of  any 
rule,  shall  be  decided  without  debate. 

Rule  14.  All  questions  of  order,  as  they  shall  occur,  with  the 
decisions  thereon,  shall  be  entered  in  the  Journal,  and  at  the  close 
of  the  day's  session  a  statement  of  all  such  questions  and  decisions 
shall  be  printed  at  the  close  of  and  as  an  appendix  to  the  Journal. 

CHAPTER   VI 
Committees  and  Their  Duties 
Rule  15.    The  President  shall  appoint  the  following  standing 
committees  to  report  upon  the  subjects  named  and  such  others 
as  may  be  referred  to  them,  viz. : 

1.  On  the  bill  of  rights,  to  consist  of  eleven  members. 

2.  On  the  Legislature,  its  organization,  and  the  number,  appor- 
tionment, election,  tenure  of  office  and  compensation  of  its  mem- 
bers, to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 


Doc.  No.  3  «J 

3.  On  the  powers,  limitations  and  duties  of  the  Legislature, 
except  as  to  matters  otherwise  referred,  to  consist  of  seventeen 
members. 

4.  On  the  right  of  suffrage  and  the  qualifications  to  hold  office, 
to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

5.  On  the  Governor  and  other  State  officers,  their  election  or 
appointment,  tenure  of  office,  compensation,  powers  and  duties, 
except  as  otherwise  referred,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

6.  On  the  judiciary,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

7.  On  the  State  finances,  revenues,  expenditures,  and  restric- 
tions on  the  powers  of  the  Legislature  in  respect  thereto,  and  to 
public  indebtedness,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

8.  On  cities,  their  organization,  government  and  powers,  to 
consist  of  seventeen  members. 

9.  On  canals,  to  consist  of  eleven  members. 

10.  On  public  utilities,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

11.  On  counties,  towns  and  villages,  their  organization,  govern- 
ment and  powers,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

12.  On  county,  town  and  village  officers,  other  than  judicial, 
their  election  or  appointment,  tenure  of  office,  compensation, 
powers  and  duties,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

13.  On  State  prisons  and  penitentiaries,  and  the  prevention 
and  punishment  of  crime,  to  consist  of  eleven  members. 

14.  On  corporations  and  institutions,  not  otherwise  herein 
specified,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

15.  On  currency,  banking  and  insurance,  to  consist  of  eleven 
members. 

16.  On  the  militia  and  military  affairs,  to  consist  of  seven 
members. 

17.  On  education  and  the  funds  relating  thereto,  to  consist  of 
seventeen  members. 

18.  On  charities  and  charitable  institutions,  to  consist  of  sev- 
enteen members. 

19.  On  industrial  interests  and  relations,  except  those  already 
referred,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

20.  On  the  conservation  of  the  natural  resources  of  the  State. 
to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

21.  On  the  relations  of  the  State  to  the  Indians  residing  therein, 
to  consist  of  seven  members. 


7  Doc.  Xo.  3 

22.  On  future  amendments  and  revisions  of  the  Constitution, 
to  consist  of  seven  members. 

23.  Revision  and  engrossment,  to  consist  of  seven  members. 

24.  Privileges  and  elections,  to  consist  of  eleven  members. 

25.  Printing,  to  consist  of  seven  members. 

26.  Contingent  expenses,  to  consist  of  seven  members. 

27.  Rules,  to  consist  of  seven  members,  and  the  President. 

28.  On  the  civil  service,  to  consist  of  eleven  members. 

29.  On  library  and  information. 

30.  On  taxation,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

Rule  16.  The  several  committees  shall  consider  and  report, 
without  unnecessary  delay,  upon  the  respective  matters  referred 
to  them  by  the  Convention. 

Rule  17.  The  Committee  on  Revision  and  Engrossment  shall 
examine  and  correct  the  constitutional  amendments  which  are 
referred  to  it,  for  the  purpose  of  avoiding  inaccuracies,  repeti- 
tions and  inconsistencies.  It  shall  also  carefully  examine  in  the 
order  in  which  they  shall  be  directed  by  the  Convention  to  be 
engrossed  for  a  third  reading,  all  constitutional  amendments  so 
engrossed,  and  see  that  the  same  are  correctly  engrossed,  and  shall 
immediately  report  the  same  in  like  order  to  the  Convention  before 
they  are  read  the  third  time. 

Rule  18.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Committee  on  Printing  to 
examine  and  report  on  all  questions  of  printing  referred  to  them ; 
to  examine  from  time  to  time,  and  ascertain  whether  the  prices 
charged  for  printing,  and  the  quantities  and  qualities  furnished, 
are  in  conformity  to  the  orders  of  the  Convention  and  to  the  con- 
ditions fixed  by  it;  to  ascertain  and  report  the  number  of  copies 
to  be  printed,  and  how  distributed ;  and  to  report  to  the  Conven- 
tion from  time  to  time,  any  measures  they  may  deem  useful  for 
the  economical  and  proper  management  of  the  Convention 
printing. 

Rule  19.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Committee  on  Contingent 
Expenses  to  inquire  into  the  expenditures  of  the  Convention,  and 
whether  the  same  are  being  or  have  been  made  in  conformity  to 
law  and  the  orders  of  the  Convention,  and  whether  proper 
vouchers  exist  for  the  same,  and  whether  the  funds  provided  for 
the  purpose  are  economically  applied,  and  to  report,  from  time 
to  time,  such  regulations  as  may  conduce  to  economy  and  secure 
the  faithful  disbursement  of  the  money  appropriated  by  law. 


Doc.  No.  3  8 

CHAPTER   VII 
General  Orders  and  Special  Orders 

Kule  20.  The  matters  referred  to  the  Committee  of  the  Whole 
Convention  shall  constitute  the  general  orders,  and  their  titles 
shall  be  recorded  in  a  calendar  kept  for  that  purpose  by  the  Sec- 
retary, in  the  order  in  which  they  shall  be  severally  referred. 

Kule  21.  The  business  of  the  general  orders  shall  be  taken  up 
in  the  following  manner,  viz. :  The  Secretary  shall  announce  the 
title  of  each  proposed  amendment  or  other  matter,  as  it  shall  be 
reached  in  its  order,  whereupon  it  shall  be  taken  up  on  the  call 
of  any  member,  without  the  putting  of  a  question  therefor,  but 
if  not  so  moved,  it  shall  lose  its  precedence  for  the  day.  And 
whenever  three  proposed  amendments  or  other  matters  have  been 
thus  moved  the  Convention  shall  go  into  Committee  of  the  Whole 
upon  them  without  further  order. 

Kule  22.  Tuesday  and  Thursday  of  each  week  shall  be  set  apart 
especially  for  the  consideration  of  the  general  orders;  but  they 
may  be  considered  on  any  other  day  when  reached  in  their  order. 

Rule  23.  Each  member  shall  be  furnished  daily  with  a  printed 
list  of  the  general  orders,  which  shall  be  kept  on  his  files  by  the 
Sergeant-at-Arms,  in  the  same  manner  as  other  printed  documents. 

Rule  24.  Any  matter  may  be  made  a  special  order  for  any  par- 
ticular day,  by  the  acceptance  of  the  report  of  the  Committee  on 
Rules,  or  by  a  two-thirds  vote,  or  by  unanimous  consent. 

CHAPTER  VIII 
Committee  of  the  Whole 
Rule  25.  Any  matter  may  be  committed  to  the  Committee  of 
the  whole  upon  the  report  of  a  standing  or  select  committee,  or 
by  unanimous  consent  at  any  time.  Any  committee  may  be  dis- 
charged from  the  further  consideration  of  any  matter  referred  to 
it,  and  such  matter  may  then  be  referred  to  the  Committee  of  the 
Whole,  by  a  vote  of  the  'Convention.  The  same  rules  shall  be  ob- 
served in  the  Committee  of  the  Whole  as  in  the  Convention,  so  far 
as  the  same  are  applicable,  except  that  the  previous  question  shall 
not  apply,  nor  the  yens  and  nays  be  taken,  nor  a  limit  be  made 
as  to  the  number  of  times  of  speaking. 


9  Doc.  No.  3 

Rule  26.  A  motion  to  "  rise  and  report  progress  "  shall  be  in 
order  at  any  stage,  and  shall  be  decided  without  debate.  A  mo- 
tion to  rise  and  report  is  not  in  order  until  each  section  and  the 
title  have  been  considered,  unless  the  limit  of  time  has  expired. 

Rule  27.  Proposed  constitutional  amendments  and  other  mat- 
ters shall  be  considered  in  Committee  of  the  Whole  in  the  follow- 
ing manner,  viz. :  They  shall  be  first  read  through,  if  the  commit- 
tee so  direct;  otherwise  they  shall  be  read  and  considered  by  sec- 
tions. When  the  limit  of  time  has  expired,  the  amendments  which 
have  been  proposed  and  not  previously  acted  upon  shall  be  voted 
upon  in  their  order  without  further  debate.  The  proposed  con- 
stitutional amendment  as  amended  shall  then  be  voted  upon  with- 
out debate,  and  the  committee  shall  then  rise  and  report  in 
accordance  with  the  action  which  it  has  taken. 

If  the  committee  shall  have  adopted  any  proposed  constitutional 
amendment,  the  same  shall  be  reported  complete  with  any  amend- 
ments made  in  the  committee  incorporated  in  their  proper  places. 

Rule  28.  If  at  any  time,  when  in  Committee  of  the  Whole,  it 
be  ascertained  that  there  is  no  quorum,  the  chairman  shall  im- 
mediately report  the  fact  to  the  President,  who  then  takes  the  chair 
for  the  purpose  of  securing  a  quorum,  and  when  that  is  obtained 
the  chairman  resumes  his  duties. 

Rule  29.  Should  the  committee  not  have  completed  the  business 
before  it  rises,  the  chairman  will  report  progress  and  ask  leave  to 
sit  again. 

CHAPTER   IX 
Proposed  Amendments  to  the  Constitution 

Rule  30.  No  proposition  for  constitutional  amendment  shall  be 
introduced  in  the  Convention  except  in  one  of  the  following 
modes,  viz. : 

1.  Under  the  order  of  introduction  of  propositions  for  consti- 
tutional amendment  by  districts,  in  numerical  order. 

2.  By  report  of  a  committee. 

Rule  31.  The  title  of  each  proposition  for  constitutional  amend- 
ment introduced  shall  state  concisely  its  subject-matter.  Matter 
which  it  is  proposed  to  strike  out  shall  be  in  brackets,  and  new 
matter  shall  be  underscored  and  when  printed  shall  be  in  italics. 
All  proposed  amendments  shall  be  presented  in  duplicate. 


Dor.  No.  3  10 

Kule  32.  All  propositions  for  constitutional  amendment,  after 
their  second  reading,  which  shall  be  by  title,  shall  be  referred  to 
a  standing  or  select  committee,  to  consider  and  report  thereon, 
and  shall  be  immediately  printed  and  placed  on  the  files  of  each 
member.  All  proposed  constitutional  amendments  reported  shall, 
if  the  report  be  agreed  to,  be  committed  to  the  Committee  of  the 
Whole  and  immediately  printed.  When  a  committee  has  reported 
that  no  amendment  should  be  made  to  the  provisions  of  the  existing 
Constitution  relating  to  any  specified  subject,  and  such  report  is 
agreed  to,  all  propositions  for  constitutional  amendment  relating 
to  that  subject  which  have  been  referred  to  that  committee  shall 
be  considered  as  rejected.  All  constitutional  amendments  pro- 
posed by  a  minority  report  from  any  committee  shall  be  printed 
and  placed  on  the  files  of  the  members  of  the  Convention. 

Rule  33.  Proposed  constitutional  amendments  reported  by  the 
Committee  of  the  Whole  shall  be  subject  to  debate  before  the  ques- 
tion to  agree  with  the  committee  on  their  report  is  put. 

Rule  34.  No  proposed  constitutional  amendment  shall  be  or- 
dered to  a  third  reading  until  it  shall  have  been  considered  in 
Committee  of  the  Whole. 

Rule  35.  No  proposed  constitutional  amendment  shall  be  put 
upon  third  reading  until  it  shall  have  been  reported  by  the  Com- 
mittee on  Revision  and  Engrossment  as  correctly  revised  and  en- 
grossed, unless  by  unanimous  consent.  Nor  shall  any  proposed 
constitutional  amendment  be  read  the  third  time,  unless  it  shall 
have  been  once  printed. 

Rule  36.  Every  proposed  constitutional  amendment  shall  re- 
ceive three  separate  readings,  previous  to  its  final  passage,  and 
the  third  reading  shall  be  on  a  day  subsequent  to  that  on  which 
the  proposed  constitutional  amendment  passed  in  Committee  of 
the  Whole. 

Rule  37.  The  third  reading  of  proposed  constitutional  amend- 
ments shall  take  place  in  the  order  in  which  they  have  been  or- 
dered to  a  third  reading,  unless  the  Convention,  by  a  vote  of  two- 
thirds  of  the  members  present,  direct  otherwise,  or  the  proposed 
constitutional  amendment  to  be  read  is  laid  on  the  table.  And 
the  question  on  the  final  passage  of  every  proposed  constitutional 
amendment  shall  be  taken  immediately  after  such  third  reading, 
and  without  debate,  but  the  vote  on  the  final  passage1  of  every  pro- 


11  Doc.  No.  3 

posed  amendment,  revision  or  addition  to  the  Constitution  shall 
be  taken  by  ayes  and  nays,  which  shall  be  entered  on  the  Journal. 

Rule  38.  In  all  cases  where  unanimous  consent  is  asked  for 
advancing  a  proposed  constitutional  amendment  out  of  its  order, 
it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  President  to  plainly  announce  such 
request  in  full  twice. 

Rule  39.  On  the  third  reading  of  a  proposed  constitutional 
amendment,  after  the  reading  of  the  title,  and  before  the  reading 
of  the  text,  the  proposed  constitutional  amendment  shall  be  open 
one  hour,  if  required,  for  debate  on  its  merits,  before  the  previous 
question  shall  be  ordered ;  but  no  member  shall  speak  more  than 
five  minutes  or  more  than  once ;  the  vote,  however,  may  be  taken 
at  any  time  when  the  debate  is  closed. 

Rule  40.  On  the  third  reading  of  the  proposed  Constitutional 
amendment,  no  amendment  thereto  shall  be  in  order,  except  to  fill 
blanks,  without  unanimous  consent. 

Rule  41.  A  motion  may  be  made  during  the  third  reading  of 
any  proposed  constitutional  amendment  to  recommit  it,  and  such 
motion  shall  not  be  debatable. 

Rule  42.  A  register  shall  be  kept  by  the  Secretary  of  all  pro- 
posed constitutional  amendments  introduced  in  the  Convention, 
in  which  shall  be  recorded,  under  appropriate  heads,  the  progress 
of  such  proposed  constitutional  amendments  from  the  date  of 
their  introduction  to  the  time  of  their  final  disposition. 

Rule  43.  In  all  cases  where  a  proposed  constitutional  amend- 
ment, order,  motion  or  resolution  shall  be  entered  on  the  Journal, 
the  name  of  the  member  introducing  or  moving  the  same  shall  also 
be  entered  on  the  Journal. 


Doc.  No.  3  12 


CHAPTER    X 
Motions  and  Their  Precedence 

Rule  44.  When  a  question  is  under  consideration,  the  following 
motions  only  shall  be  received;  which  motions  shall  have  prece- 
dence in  the  order  stated,  viz. : 

Motions  to,  or  for: 

1.  Adjourn  for  the  day. 

2.  Recess. 

3.  Call  of  the  Convention.  V     Not  amendable  or  debatable. 

4.  Previous  question. 

5.  Lay  on  the  table. 

6.  Postpone  indefinitely,  not  amendable,  but  debatable. 

7.  Postpone  to  a  certain  day. 

8.  Go  into  Committee  of  the  Whole. 

9.  Commit  to  Committee  of  the  Whole 

10.  Commit  to  a  standing  committee. 

11.  Commit  to  a  select  committee. 

12.  Amend. 


Preclude  debates  on 
main  question. 


Rule  45.  Every  motion  or  resolution  shall  be  stated  by  the 
President  or  read  by  the  Secretary  before  debate,  and  again,  if 
requested  by  any  member,  immediately  before  putting  the  ques- 
tion; and  every  motion,  except  those  specified  in  subdivisions  1  to 
11,  inclusive,  of  rule  44,  shall  be  reduced  to  writing  if  the  Presi- 
dent or  any  member  request  it. 

Rule  46.  After  a  motion  shall  be  stated  by  the  President,  it 
shall  be  deemed  in  the  possession  of  the  Convention,  but  may  be 
withdrawn  at  any  time  before  it  shall  be  decided  or  amended. 

Rule  47.  The  motion  to  adjourn,  to  take  a  recess,  and  to  ad- 
journ for  a  longer  period  than  one  day,  shall  always  be  in  order; 
but  the  latter  motion  shall  not  preclude  debate. 

Rule  48.  A  motion  to  reconsider  any  vote  must  be  made  on 
the  same  day  on  which  the  vote  proposed  to  be  reconsidered  was 
taken,  or  on  the  legislative  day  next  succeeding,  and  by  a  member 
who  voted  in  the  majority,  except  to  reconsider  a  vote  on  the  final 
passage  of  a  proposed  constitutional  amendment,  which  shall  be 


13  Doc.  No.  3 

privileged  to  any  member.  Such  motion  may  be  made  under  any 
order  of  business,  but  shall  be  considered  only  under  the  order  of 
business  in  which  the  vote  proposed  to  be  reconsidered  occurred. 
When  a  motion  for  reconsideration  is  decided,  that  decision  shall 
not  be  reconsidered,  and  no  question  shall  be  twice  reconsidered ; 
nor  shall  any  vote  be  reconsidered  upon  either  of  the  following 
motions : 

To  adjourn. 

To  lay  on  the  table. 

To  take  from  the  table ;  or 

For  the  previous  question. 

Rule  49.  No  amendment  to  a  motion  shall  be  received  while 
another  is  pending,  unless  it  be  an  amendment  to  the  amendment 
and  germane  to  the  subject. 

CHAPTER  XI 

Of  Resolutions 

Rule  50.  The  following  classes  of  resolutions  shall  lie  over  one 
day  for  consideration,  after  which  they  may  be  called  up,  as  of 
course,  under  their  appropriate  order  of  business : 

1.  Resolutions  giving  rise  to  debate,  except  such  as  shall  relate 
to  the  disposition  of  business  immediately  before  the  Convention, 
to  the  business  of  the  day  on  which  they  may  be  offered  or  to 
adjournments  or  recesses,  shall  lie  over  one  day  for  consideration, 
after  which  they  may  be  called  up,  as  of  course,  under  their 
appropriate  order  of  business. 

2.  Resolutions  containing  calls  for  information  from  any  of  the 
executive  departments,  from  State,  county  or  municipal  officers,  or 
from  any  corporate  bodies,  shall  be  referred  to  the  appropriate 
committee.  Such  committee  shall  report  thereon  within  three 
legislative  days. 

Rule  51.  All  resolutions  for  the  printing  of  an  extra  number 
of  documents  shall  be  referred,  as  of  course,  to  the  standing  Com- 
mittee on  Printing,  for  their  report  thereon  before  final  action  by 
the  Convention. 

Rule  52.  All  resolutions  authorizing  or  contemplating  expendi- 
tures for  the  purposes  of  the  Convention  shall  be  referred  to  the 
standing  Committee  on  Contingent  Expenses,  for  tlieir  report 
thereon  before  final  action  by  the  Convention. 


Doc.  No.  3  14 

CHAPTER  XII 
The  Previous  Question 
Eule  53.  The  "previous  question"  shall  be  put  as  follows: 
"'Shall  the  main  question  now  be  put?"  and  until  it  is  decided, 
shall  preclude  all  amendments  or  debate.  When,  on  taking  the 
previous  question,  the  Convention  shall  decide  that  the  main  ques- 
tion shall  not  now  be  put,  the  main  question  shall  be  considered 
as  still  remaining  under  debate.  The  "  main  question  "  shall  be 
on  the  passage  of  the  proposed  amendment  to  the  Constitution, 
resolution  or  other  matter  under  consideration,  but  when  amend- 
ments thereto  are  pending,  the  question  shall  first  be  taken  upon 
such  amendments  in  their  order,  and  when  adopted  in  Committee 
of  the  Whole,  and  not  acted  on  in  the  Convention,  the  question 
shall  be  taken  upon  such  amendments  in  like  order. 

CHAPTER    XIII 

The  Convention  Chamber  and  Privileges  of  Admission  to  the 

Floor 

'Rule  54.  The  following  classes  of  persons,  besides  officers  and 
members  of  the  Convention,  shall  be  entitled  to  admission  to  the 
floor  of  the  Convention  during  the  session  thereof,  viz. : 

1.  Governor,  Lieutenant-Governor,  and  ex-Governors  of  the 
State. 

2.  Judges  of  the  Court  of  Appeals  and  of  the  Supreme  Court. 

3.  Members  of  former  Constitutional  Conventions. 

4.  The  members  of  the  Senate  and  Assembly  and  ex-Speakers. 

5.  The  State  officers,   deputies  and   commissioners. 

6.  The  Regents  of  the  University. 

7.  United   States    Senators   and    Congressmen. 

8.  The  Capitol  Commissioners. 

9.  Persons  in  the  exercise  of  an  official  duty  directly  connected 
with  the  business  of  the  Convention. 

10.  The  reporters  for  the  press,  as  provided  by  subdivision  7 
of  rule  2. 

No  other  person  shall  be  admitted  to  the  floor  during  the  session, 
except  upon  the  permission  of  the  President  or  by  vote  of  the  Con- 
vention ;  and  persons,  so  admitted  shall  bo  allowed  to  occupy  places 
only  in  the  seats  in  the  rear  of  the  Assembly  Chamber.     All  per- 


15  Doc.  Xo.  3 

mits  granted  by  the  President  may  be  revoked  by  him  at  pleasure, 
or  upon  the  order  of  the  Convention.  ISTo  person  shall  be  entitled 
to  the  privileges  of  the  floor  of  the  Convention  as  a  legislative  re- 
porter of  a  newspaper  who  is  interested  in  pending  or  contemplated 
constitutional  revision,  or  who  is  employed  by,  or  receives  com- 
pensation from,  any  corporation,  except  a  newspaper,  news  or  press 
association.  The  doors  of  the  Convention  shall  be  kept  open  to 
the  public  during  all  its  sessions. 

CHAPTER    XIV 
General  Rules 

Rule  55.  Equivalent  motions,  resolutions  or  amendments 
thereto,  shall  not  be  entertained.  If  any  question  contains  several 
distinct  propositions,  it  shall  be  divided  by  the  Chair  at  the  request 
of  any  member,  but  a  motion  to  "  strike  out  and  insert "  shall  be 
indivisible. 

Rule  56.  All  proposed  action  touching  the  rules  and  orders  of 
business  shall  be  referred,  as  of  course,  to  the  Committee  on 
Rules ;  such  committee  may  sit  during  the  session  of  the  Conven- 
tion without  special  leave,  and  report  at  any  time  on  rules  or  order 
of  business  so  referred  to  them.  It  will  be  in  order  to  call  up 
for  consideration  at  any  time  a  report  from  the  Committee  on 
Rules.  Any  member  may  object  to  its  consideration  until  the  next 
legislative  day,  and,  if  sustained  by  twenty-four  other  members, 
the  consideration  shall  be  so  postponed,  but  only  once.  Pending  the 
final  consideration  thereof,  but  one  motion,  except  by  unanimous 
consent,  that  the  Convention  adjourn,  may  be  entertained,  and 
no  other  dilatory  motion  shall  be  entertained  until  such  report  is 
fully  disposed  of.  A  motion  to  suspend  the  rules  shall  in  all  cases 
state  specifically  the  object  of  the  suspension,  and  every  case  of 
suspension  of  a  rule  under  such  notice  and  motion  shall  be  held  to 
apply  only  to  the  object  specified  therein.  Provided  that  when 
ordered  so  to  do  by  the  Convention  a  standing  committee  shall 
make  a  report  on  a  constitutional  amendment  or  other  subject,  the 
Committee  on  Rules  shall  report  a  rule  limiting  the  time  for  de- 
bate; and  upon  such  report  no  member  shall  speak  more  than 
once,  nor  more  than  five  minutes.  Such  report  shall  stand  as 
the  time  limited  for  debate  on  the  subject-matter  referred  to  in 


Doc.  No.  3  16 

such  rule,  and  the  previous  question  or  other  motion  to  close  debate 
shall  not  be  in  order  until  the  expiration  of  the  time  so  allotted, 
or  the  debate  has  been  closed;  the  time  thus  allotted  for  debate 
shall  be  equally  divided  between  those  in  favor  and  those  opposed 
to  the  subject-matter  under  consideration.  All  questions  or  mo- 
tions authorized  by  this  rule  shall  be  decided  at  once  without  delay 
or  debate,  except  as  herein  expressly  allowed. 

Rule  57.  The  yeas  and  nays  may  be  taken  on  any  question 
whenever  so  required  by  any  fifteen  members  (unless  a  division  by 
yeas  and  nays  be  already  pending),  and  when  so  taken  shall  be 
entered  on  the  Journal. 

Rule  58.  When  the  Convention  shall  be  equally  divided  on  any 
question,  including  the  President's  vote,  the  question  shall  be 
deemed  to  be  lost. 

Rule  59.  In  considering  the  report  of  the  Committee  on  Re- 
vision and  Engrossment,  each  article  shall  be  open  to  amendment 
germane  to  such  changes  as  may  have  been  reported  by  the  com- 
mittee, without  previous  notice,  but  no  one  shall  speak  more  than 
five  minutes,  or  more  than  once,  on  any  proposition  to  amend. 

Rule  60.  When  a  blank  is  to  be  filled  and  different  sums  or 
times  shall  be  proposed,  the  question  shall  be  first  taken  on  the 
highest  sum  and  the  longest  time. 

Rule  61.  A  majority  of  the  Convention  shall  constitute  a 
quorum.  In  all  cases  of  the  absence  of  members  during  its 
sessions,  the  members  present  shall  take  such  measures  as  they 
shall  deem  necessary  to  secure  the  presence  of  absentees,  and  may 
inflict  such  censure  or  pecuniary  penalty  as  they  may  deem  just 
on  those  who,  on  being  called  on  for  that  purpose,  shall  not  render 
sufficient  excuse  for  their  absence.  No  constitutional  amendment 
shall  be  adopted  unless  by  the  assent  of  a  majority  of  all  the 
members  elected  to  the  Convention. 

Rule  62.  For  the  purpose  of  securing  the  attendance  of  mem- 
bers, a  call  of  the  Convention  may  be  made,  but  such  call  shall  not 
be  in  order  after  the  main  question  has  been  ordered,  nor  after 
the  voting  on  any  question  has  commenced,  nor  after  the  third 
reading  of  an  amendment  has  been  completed. 


17  Doc.  Ho.  3 

Rule  03.  When  less  than  a  quorum  vote  on  any  subject  under 
consideration  by  the  Convention,  it  shall  be  in  order,  on  motion, 
to  close  the  bar  of  the  Convention,  whereupon  the  roll  of  members 
shall  be  called  by  the  Secretary,  and  if  it  is  ascertained  that  a 
quorum  is  present,  either  by  answering  to  their  names  or  by  their 
presence  in  the  Convention,  the  yeas  and  nays  shall  again  be 
ordered  by  the  President,  and  if  any  member  present  refuses  to 
vote,  such  refusal  shall  be  deemed  a  contempt,  and  any  member  or 
members  so  offending  shall  be  cited  before  the  Committee  on  Privi- 
leges and  Elections,  which,  after  inquiry,  shall  report  to  the  Con- 
vention for  such  action  as  the  facts  shall  seem  to  warrant,  and, 
unless  purged,  the  Convention  may  order  the  Sergeant-at-Arms  to 
remove  said  member  or  members  without  the  bar  of  the  Conven- 
tion, and  all  privileges  of  membership  shall  be  refused  the  person 
or  persons  so  offending  until  the  contempt  be  duly  purged. 

Rule  64.  Whenever  any  person  shall  be  brought  before  the  liar 
of  the  Convention  for  adjudged  breach  of  its  privileges,  no  debate 
shall  be  in  order,  but  the  President  shall  proceed  to  execute  the 
judgment  of  the  Convention  without  delay  or  debate. 

Rule  65.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Secretary  to  keep  the 
Journal  of  each  day's  proceedings,  which  shall  be  printed  and  laid 
on  the  table  of  members  on  the  morning  after  its  approval.  In 
addition  to  his  other  duties,  he  shall  prepare  and  supervise  the 
printing  of  the  calendars  of  the  orders  of  the  day  and  cause  them 
to  be  placed  on  the  files  before  the  beginning  of  each  day's  session. 
All  appointments  of  officers  and  employees  shall  be  entered  on  the 
Journal  of  the  Convention,  with  the  date  of  appointment. 

Rule  66.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  stenographer  of  the  Con- 
vention to  be  present  at  every  session  of  the  Convention.  He  shall 
take  stenographic  notes  of  the  debates  in  the  Convention  and  in 
Committee  of  the  Whole  and  shall,  at  each  day's  session  of  the 
Convention,  furnish  a  copy  of  the  debates  of  the  day  before,  writ- 
ten out  in  long-hand,  and  file  the  same  with  the  Secretary,  who 
shall  keep  the  same  in  his  office,  and  the  same  shall  at  all  times  be 
open  to  the  inspection  of  delegates. 

Rule  67.  At  a  reasonable  time,  to  be  determined  by  the  Con- 
vention, and  at  least  five  days  before  final  adjournment,  the  Com- 
mittee on  Revision  and  Engrossment  shall  be  instructed  to  accu- 
rately enroll  and  engross  the  present  State  Constitution,  with  all 
amendments  thereto  properly  inserted,  or  the  proposed  new  Con- 


Doc.  No.  3  18 

stitution ;  and  the  same  shall  be  reported  by  said  committee  to  the 
Convention,  read  through  therein,  and  submitted  to  a  final  vote 
prior  to  its  final  adjournment.  When  an  article  of  the  Constitu- 
tion is  amended,  or  a  new  article  substituted  or  added,  such 
amended  article,  or  new  article,  shall  be  enrolled  and  engrossed 
entire  in  its  proper  place  in  the  Constitution. 

CHAPTER   XV 
Miscellaneous  Provisions 

Eule  68.  The  Sergeant-at-Arms  shall,  under  the  direction  of 
the  'Committee  on  Printing,  receive  from  the  printer  all  matter 
printed  for  the  use  of  the  Convention,  and  keep  a  record  of  the 
time  of  the  reception  of  each  document,  and  the  number  of  copies 
received,  and  cause  a  copy  of  each  to  be  placed  on  the  desk  of  each 
member  immediately  after  their  reception  by  him.  Subject  to 
the  direction  of  the  President,  he  shall  enforce  the  rules  of  the 
Convention. 

Rule  GO.  Separate  files  of  the  daily  Journal,  reports  of  the  com- 
mittees and  of  all  documents  ordered  to  be  printed  shall  be  pre- 
pared and  kept  by  the  Sergeant-at-Arms,  and  one  copy  shall  be 
placed  upon  the  desk  of  each  member  of  the  Convention  and  of  the 
Secretary. 

Rule  70.  There  shall  be  printed,  as  of  course,  and  without  any 
special  order,  1,000  copies  of  the  Journal  and  of  all  reports  of 
committees  on  the  subject  of  Constitutional  revision. 

Rule  71.  Six  hundred  copies  of  the  Journal  and  six  hundred 
copies  of  the  reports  as  printed  shall  be  bound  and  distributed  as 
follows,  viz. :  To  each  member  of  the  Convention,  two  copies ;  State 
Library,  five  copies;  the  library  of  the  Senate,  five  copies;  the 
library  of  the  Assembly,  live  copies;  the  office  of  cadi  county 
clerk,  one  copy;  and  the  remaining  copies  to  such  libraries  and 
other  institutions  as  shall  be  designated  by  the  President  or  by 
the  Convention. 

Rule  72.  The  officers  of  the  Convention  appointed  by  the  Presi- 
dent shall  perform  such  duties  as  he  may  prescribe,  and  for  any 
breach  of  duty  any  such  officer  may  be  removed  and  his  successor 
appointed  by  the  President.  Tbe  officers  of  the  Convention  ap- 
pointed by  the  Secretary  shall  perform  such  duties  as  he  may 
prescribe,  and  for  any  breach  of  duty  any  such  officers  may  be 
removed  and  his  successor  be  appointed  by  the  Secretary. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  4 


REPORT  OF  THE  STATE  PRINTING  BOARD 


To  the  Constitutional  Convention: 

Gentlemen. — Acting  in  accordance  with  your  resolution 
dated  April  7,  1915,  authorizing  the  State  Printing  Board  to 
execute  a  contract  for  the  printing  of  the  journals,  documents 
and  proceedings  of  the  Constitutional  Convention,  pursuant  to 
the  recommendation  of  the  Committee  (of  the  Convention)  on 
Printing,  in  their  report  made  April  7,  1915,  we,  the  under- 
signed, composing  the  State  Printing  Board,  beg  leave  to  report 
that,  on  the  22d  day  of  April,  1915,  we  executed  the  contract 
with  J.  B.  Lyon  Company  for  the  printing  of  the  journals,  docu- 
ments and  proceedings  of  the  Convention  recommended  by  said 
Committee,  as  required  by  said  resolution ;  that  said  contract  is 
in  form  as  recommended  by  the  report  of  said  Committee  and  re- 
quired by  the  said  resolution  of  the  Convention;  that  one  dupli- 
cate original  of  said  contract,  executed  by  J.  B.  Lyon  Company 
and  by  the  State  Printing  Board,  has  been  filed  with  the  Comp- 
troller of  the  State,  endorsed  with  his  approval,  as  required  bi- 
section 3  6  of  the  Finance  Law,  and  a  duplicate  original  of  said 
contract,  as  executed,  is  annexed  hereto  and  submitted  herewith, 
except  that  the  exhibits  appended  thereto  are  copies  of  the 
originals  of  those  attached  to  the  contract  filed  with  the  Comp- 
troller. 


Doc.  Xo.  4  2 

That,  upon  the  execution  of  said  contract,  and  bearing  even 
date  therewith,  the  said  J.  B.  Lyon  Company  executed  to  the 
People  of  the  State  its  bond  in  the  penal  sum  of  $25,000,  with 
the  Fidelity  and  Deposit  Company  of  Baltimore,  Maryland,  as 
surety,  conditioned  for  the  faithful  performance  of  its  said  con- 
tract, which  bond  was  approved  by  the  Comptroller,  as  to 
form,  by  the  Attorney-General,  and  the  same  has  been  filed  with 
the  Comptroller,  as  required  by  law. 
All  of  which  is  respectfully  submitted. 

Feaxcis  M.  Hugo, 

Secretary  of  Stale. 
Eugexe  M.  Teavis, 

State  Comptroller. 
Egbuet  E.  Woodbuey, 

Attorney-General. 
Composing  the  State  Printing  Board. 
Dated  April  23,  1915. 


3  Doc  No.  4 

[copy] 

ARTICLES  OF  AGREEMENT 

Made  this  22d  day  of  April,  1915,  by  and  between  the  People 
of  the  State  of  New  York,  by  Francis  M.  lingo,  Secretary 
of  State,  Eugene  M.  Travis,  State  Comptroller,  and  Egbnrt  E. 
Woodbury,  Attorney-General,  composing  the  Printing  Board  of 
the  State  of  New  York,  pursuant  to  a  resolution  duly  adopted 
on  the  7th  day  of  April,  1915,  by  the  Convention  to  Revise  the 
Constitution  of  the  State  of  New  York  and  Amend  the  same, 
assembled  at  Albany,  commencing  the  6th  day  of  April,  1915, 
acting  under  and  by  virtue  of  an  Act  of  the  Legislature  of  the 
State  of  New  York,  being  chapter  7G  of  the  Laws  of  1915, 
parties  of  the  first  part,  and  J.  B.  Lyon  Company,  of  Albany, 
N.  Y.,  party  of  the  second  part, 

WITNESSETH  : 

Whebeas,  The  Secretary  of  State,  the  State  Comptroller  and 
the  Attorney-General,  constituting  the  Printing  Board  of  the 
State  of  New  York,  have,  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of 
said  chapter  7G  of  the  Laws  of  1915,  above  referred  to,  and  in 
accordance  with  the  State  Printing  Law,  being  chapter  GO  of  the 
Laws  of  1909,  and  acts  amendatory  thereof,  given  and  caused  to 
be  duly  published  a  notice,  which  is  attached  hereto  and  made  a 
part  hereof,  that  they,  the  said  Secretary  of  State,  State  Comp- 
troller and  Attorney-General,  as  such  Printing  Board,  would  on 
Saturday,  the  3d  day  of  April,  1915,  receive  sealed  proposals  in 
writing  for  the  printing  of  documents,  journals  and  proceedings 
of  said  Convention  to  amend  and  revise  the  Constitution,  as  ap- 
pears by  the  notice  hereto  attached;  and 

Whereas,  Said  party  of  the  second  part  has,  in  accordance 
with  the  provisions  of  the  above-mentioned  acts  and  the  terms  of 
said  notice,  made  and  delivered  to  the  Secretary  of  State,  the 
State  Comptroller  and  the  Attorney-General,  as  such  Printing 
Board,  a  sealed  proposal  in  writing,  which  is  also  hereto  attached 
and  made  a  part  hereof,  to  do  and  perform  the  public  printing 
specified  and  named  in  said  chapter  7G  of  the  Laws  of  1915, 
specified,  named  and  described  therein  as  the  printing  of  docu- 
ments, journals  and  proceedings  of  the  Convention ;  and 


Doc.  No.  4  4 

Whereas,  The  said  Printing  Board  lias  duly  opened  the  said 
proposals  received,  pursuant  to  the  said  notice,  and  in  accordance 
with  the  provisions  of  said  chapter  70  of  the  Laws  of  1915,  has 
duly  transmitted  the  said  proposals  to  said  Convention  at  its  first 
session  on  the  Gth  day  of  April,  1915;  and  the  said  Printing 
Board  having  recommended  to  said  Convention  said  proposal 
received  from  the  party  of  the  second  part  as  the  proposal  the 
acceptance  of  which  they  consider  most  advantageous,  and  having 
furnished  a  blank  form  of  contract,  in  accordance  with  such 
recommendation,  for  the  use  of  the  Convention,  should  it  so 
determine;  and 

Whereas,  The  contract  for  the  printing  of  the  documents, 
journals  and  proceedings  of  said  Convention  has  been  duly 
awarded  by  said  Convention  to  said  party  of  the  second  part,  in 
accordance  with  the  provisions  of  chapter  76  of  the  Laws  of  1915, 
and  under  the  terms  of  said  notice  hereto  attached,  and  the  bid 
and  proposal  hereto  attached,  and  the  several  covenants  and  agree- 
ments contained  therein,  and  under  the  limitations  aforesaid; 
and 

Whereas,  The  State  Printing  Board  has  been  authorized  to 
execute  this  contract  for  the  printing  of  the  journals,  documents 
and  proceedings  of  the  said  Convention,  pursuant  to  the  recom- 
mendation of  the  Committee  on  Printing  of  said  Convention,  in 
its  report  made  April  1,  1915,  as  appears  from  a  true  copy  of 
the  resolution  of  said  Convention,  duly  adopted  April  7,  1915, 
and  from  a  true  copy  of  said  report  of  the  Convention  Committee 
on  Printing,  both  of  which  are  attached  hereto  and  made  a  part 
hereof : 
Now,  Therefore,  these  Articles  of  Agreement  Witnessetii  : 

That  said  party  of  the  second  part  will,  at  some  suitable  place 
in  the  State  of  New  York,  execute,  perform  and  do  with  accuracy 
and  dispatch  all  the  printing  and  other  work  as  provided  for  by 
this  contract,  in  such  quantities  as  the  Convention,  its  duly 
designated  committee  or  other  proper  authority  thereof  may  re- 
quire; and  furnish  all  paper  and  other  material  required,  and 
do  all  folding,  collating,  stitching,  trimming,  engraving,  illus- 
trating and  binding  provided  tor,  and  deliver  the  same  at  the 
time  and  in  the  manner  and  at  a  place  or  places,  as  hereinafter 
provided,  and  at  and  for  1\ie  particular  sum  or  sums  and  detailed 


5  Doc.  No.  4 

price  or  prices  and  upon  the  computation  and  conditions  respec- 
tively referred  to  and  set  forth  in  said  bid  and  proposal  hereto 
annexed. 

The  party  of  the  first  part  agrees  to  pay  as  consideration  the 
prices  for  the  work  so  agreed  to  be  done  and  performed  and 
materials  furnished  by  the  said  party  of  the  second  part,  the  said 
sum  or  sums,  price  or  prices,  set  opposite  the  respective  detailed 
items  and  specifications  in  said  annexed  proposal,  the  said  work 
and  materials  as  aforesaid  to  be  paid  for  by  warrant  drawn  by 
the  State  Comptroller  upon  the  Treasurer,  upon  vouchers  signed 
by  the  President  or  Vice-President  of  the  said  Convention,  and 
by  the  secretary  or  an  assistant  secretary  designated  by  the  secre- 
tary thereof  for  that  duty,  out  of  any  moneys  in  the  treasury  appro- 
priated for  that  purpose. 

And  it  is  Expressly  Understood  and  Agreed,  That  the  said 
parties  of  the  first  part  shall  withhold  from  such  payment  or 
payments  until  the  final  and  full  completion  of  all  work  per- 
formed under  this  contract  a  sum  which  shall  equal  as  near  as 
may  be  15  per  cent,  of  said  contract  price. 

And  it  is  Further  Agreed,  That  each  page  of  documents, 
journals  and  proceedings  shall  be  set  in  the  same  size  of  type, 
and  the  same  weight  and  quality  of  paper  shall  be  used  as  in  the 
samples  submitted  by  said  Printing  Board  to  the  party  of  the 
second  part,  and  which  samples  are  attached  hereto  and  made  a 
part  hereof. 

And  it  is  Expressly  Understood  and  Agreed,  That  all 
printing  necessary  to  be  done  during  the  session  or  sessions  of  the 
Convention  shall  be  properly  and  accurately  executed  and 
promptly  delivered,  and  should  the  Convention  at  any  time  re- 
quire any  part  of  the  work  to  be  performed  in  extra  haste,  the 
work  thus  required  shall  be  done  without  extra  charge  therefor; 
and  upon  complaint  in  writing  by  the  Committee  on  Printing  of 
said  convention,  that  the  party  of  the  second  part  has  failed  to 
comply  with  this  provision  of  the  contract,  it  is  agreed  that  said 
Convention,  or  its  duly  designated  committee  or  other  proper 
authority  thereof,  shall  have  power  to  make  summary  inquiry 
into  the  facts  and  circumstances  of  such  failure,  after  notice  to 
the  party  of  the  second  part.  If,  after  hearing  all  the  parties, 
the  said   Convention,   or  a   duly  designated   committee  or  other 


Doc.  No.  4  6 

proper  authority  thereof,  is  satisfied  that  the  complaint  is  just 
and  proper,  and  the  interests  of  the  State  so  require,  said  Conven- 
tion, its  duly  designated  committee  or  other  proper  authority 
thereof,  may  cause  such  printing  to  be  continued  elsewhere,  at 
the  best  price  obtainable  therefor,  having  due  regard  to  the  char- 
acter of  the  work  and  the  time  within  which  it  is  to  be  performed, 
and  charge  the  excess,  if  any,  over  the  contract  price  herein  pro- 
vided for,  to  said  party  of  the  second  part;  and  such  excess  may 
be  deducted  from  any  money  due  or  to  become  due  to  said  party 
of  the  second  part  under  this  contract. 

And  it  is  Further  Understood  and  Agreed,  That  this  con- 
tract includes  cartage,  delivery  of  books,  blanks  and  other  printed 
matter,  at  such  times  and  places  in  the  city  of  Albany  as  the  Con- 
vention, its  duly  designated  committee  or  other  proper  authority 
thereof  may  direct. 

It  is  Further  Understood,  That  no  extra  pay  will  be  allowed 
for  corrections  or  alterations  in  proof  sheets,  and  that  in  laying 
out  said  journals,  documents  and  proceedings  for  binding,  they 
shall  be  so  printed  that  each  volume  shall  contain  not  less  than 
one  thousand  pages,  unless  with  the  written  consent  of  the  Con- 
vention, its  duly  designated  committee  or  other  proper  authority 
thereof. 

And  it  is  Still  Further  Agreed,  That  the  said  party  of  the 
second  part  shall  not  assign,  transfer,  convey,  sublet  or  otherwise 
dispose  of  this  contract  or  agreement,  or  of  its  right,  title  or 
interest  therein,  or  its  power  to  execute  the  same,  to  any  other 
person,  company  or  corporation,  without  the  previous  consent  in 
writing  of  the  said  Convention,  its  duly  designated  committee  or 
other  proper  authority  thereof;  and  in  respect  thereto,  said  party 
of  the  second  part  agrees  to  comply  with  the  provisions  of  sec- 
tion 43  of  the  State  Finance  Law. 

And  it  is  IIkkeby  Further  Stipulated  and  Agreed,  That  no 
laborer,  workman  or  mechanic  in  the  employ  of  the  said  parly  ol' 
tho  second  part,  or  in  the  employ  of  any  sub  contractor,  or  person 
doing  or  contracting  to  do  (ho  whole  or  any  part  of  the  work  con- 
templated by  this  contract,  shall  be  permitted  to  work  more  than 
eight  hours  in  any  one  calendar  day,  except  in  cases  of  extra- 
ordinary emergency,  caused  by  fire,  flood  or  danger  to  lite  or 


7  Doc  No.  4 

property,  and  this  contract  shall  be  void  and  of  no  effect  unless 
the  party  of  the  second  part  shall  comply  with  the  foregoing  pro- 
visions. 

It  is  Fuetheb  Stipulated  and  Agreed,  That  each  laborer, 
workman  or  mechanic  employed  by  the  contractor,  sub-contractor, 
or  other  person  on,  about  or  upon  the  work  herein  provided  for, 
shall  be  paid  not  less  than  the  prevailing  rate  for  a  day's  work 
in  the  same  trade  or  occupation  in  the  locality  within  the  State 
where  such  work  is  carried  on,  and  that  this  contract  shall  be 
void  and  of  no  effect  unless  the  contractor  shall  comply  with  the 
foregoing  provisions. 

It  is  Further  Expressly  Understood  and  Agreed,  That 
said  parties  of  the  first  part  shall  be  at  liberty  and  shall  have  the 
right  at  any  time  to  revoke,  abrogate,  modify,  cancel  or  annul  this 
contract  for  failure  to  comply  with,  or  non-performance  of  any 
of  its  provisions  on  the  part  of  the  party  of  the  second  part. 

In  Witness  Whereof,  The  Secretary  of  State,  the  State 
Comptroller  and  the  Attorney-General,  composing  the  Printing- 
Board  of  the  State  of  Xew  York,  have  hereunto  set  their  hands 
and  seals,  and  the  party  of  the  second  part  has  caused  these 
articles  of  agreement  to  be  signed  by  its  vice-president,  and  its 
corporate  seal  to  be  hereunto  affixed,  attested  by  its  secretary. 

THE  PEOPLE  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW  YORK, 
[l.  s.]  By  Francis  M.  Hugo, 

Secretary   of  State. 
[l.  s.]  Eugene  M.  Travis, 

State   Comptroller. 
[l.  s,]  Egburt   E.    Woodbury, 

Attorney-General , 

Composing  the  State  Printing  Board,  acting  at  the  direction  of 
the  Convention  to  Revise  the  Constitution  of  the  State  of  Xew 
York  and  amend  the  same. 

J.  B.  Lyon  Company, 
[l.  s.]  By  Charles  M.  Winchester, 

Attest:  Vice-President. 

E.  A.  Lewis, 

Acting  Secretary. 


Doc.  No.  4  8 


[Five  folios.] 


[copy] 
GENERAL— ALL   COUNTIES. 


LAWS  OF  NEW  YORK.— By  Authority. 

Ciiap.  76. 

AN  ACT  to  further  provide  for  the  convention  to  revise  the  constitution  and 
amend  the  same  to  convene  on  the  first  Tuesday  of  April,  nineteen  hun- 
dred and  fifteen. 

Became  a  law  March   17,   1915,  with  the  approval  of  the  Governor.     Passed, 
three-fifths  being  present. 

The  People  of  the  Slate  of  New  York,  represented  in  Senate  and  Assembly, 
do  cutict  as  follows: 

Section  1.  The  assembly  chamber  is  hereby  designated  as  the  place  in  the 
Capitol  and  twelve  o'clock  noon  as  the  hour  of  the  first  Tuesday  of  April, 
nineteen  hundred  and  fifteen,  for  the  delegates  elected  to  the  convention  to 
revise  the  constitution  and  amend  the  same,  to  convene. 

§  2.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  secretary  of  state  after  calling  the  con- 
vention to  order,  to  call  the  roll  thereof  and  to  administer  the  constitutional 
oath  of  office  to  the  members. 

§  3.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  comptroller  to  draw  his  warrants  for  the 
payment  of  delegates'  services,  and  for  the  compensation,  fixed  by  the  con- 
vention, of  officers,  employees  and  assistants  appointed  by  the  convention,  for 
the  printing  of  its  documents,  journals  and  proceedings,  and  for  such  other 
expenses  as  shall  be  incurred  by  the  convention,  upon  vouchers  signed  by  the 
president  ur  a  vice  president  of  the  convention,  and  by  the  secretary  of  the 
convention,  or  an  assistant  secretary  designated  by  the  secretary  for  that  duty, 
and  the  treasurer  shall  pay  such  warrants  out  of  any  moneys  in  the  treasury 
appropriated  for  that  purpose. 

§  4.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  superintendent  of  public  buildings  to  place 
at  the  use  of  the  convention,  its  officers  and  committees,  the  assembly 
chamber  and,  so  far  as  they  may  be  required,  such  other  rooms  in  the  capitol 
as  are  ordinarily  devoted  to  the  uses  of  the  legislative  department. 

§  o.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  printing  board  forthwith  to  give  notice  in 
accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the  state  printing  law,  except  as  to  time, 
that  on  .Saturday,  the  third  day  of  April,  nineteen  hundred  and  fifteen,  they 
will  receive  sealed  proposals  for  the  printing  of  the  documents,  journals  and 
proceedings  of  the  convention.  The  printing  board  shall  open  the  proposals 
received  pursuant  to  such  notice  and  shall  transmit  the  same  to  the  conven- 
tion at  its  first  session,  together  with  a  recommendation  by  the  board  as  to 
the  bid,  the  acceptance  of  which  they  consider  most  advantageous,  and  with 
a  blank  form  of  contract  in  accordance  with  such  recommendation  for  the  use 
of  the  convention  should  it  so  determine. 

§  <i.  This  act  shall  take  effeci  immediately. 

State  of  New  York, 
Office  of  the  Secretary  of  State. 

I  have  compared  the  preceding  with  the  original  law  on  file  in  this  office,  and 
do  hereby  certify  that  the  same  is  a  correct  transcript  therefrom  and  of  the 
whole  of  said  original  law. 

FRANCIS  M.  HUGO 

Secretary  of  State 


9  Doc.  No.  4 

[copy] 
LEGAL  NOTICES 

Peoposals  fok  Constitutional  Convention  Printing 

Pursuant  to  Chapter  76,  Laws  of  1915,  the  undersigned,  com- 
posing the  State  Printing  Board,  hereby  give  notice  that  they 
will  receive  sealed  proposals  Saturday,  the  3d  day  of  April,  1915, 
at  the  office  of  the  State  Comptroller,  for  executing  the  printing 
work  provided  to  be  done  by  said  act,  for  the  Constitutional  Con- 
vention, including  delivery. 

It  being  expressly  understood  that  such  proposals  for  printing 
shall  include  all  printing  required  to  be  done  in  pursuance  of  said 
act,  including  composition,  paper,  presswork,  folding,  collating, 
stitching  and  trimming  of  the  Convention  journals,  documents, 
bills  and  all  publications  required  to  be  done  by  said  act. 

Proposals  must  be  made  on  blank  forms,  furnished  on  applica- 
tion to  the  State  Printing  Board. 

Samples  showing  form  and  style  of  type  and  paper  to  be  used 
may  be  obtained  from  the  State  Printing  Board. 

All  such  proceedings  and  journals  and  other  printing  or  pub- 
lications, copy  of  which  shall  be  delivered  to  the  printer  in  the 
afternoon  of  any  day  shall  be  delivered  duly  printed,  folded, 
stitched  and  trimmed  to  the  document  room  of  the  Convention 
between  eight  and  nine  o'clock  in  the  forenoon  of  the  next  day. 

To  every  bid  there  shall  be  annexed  a  satisfactory  guaranty  for 
the  proper  performance  of  the  contract,  by  guarantor  certified  by 
the  county  judge  of  the  county  or  a  Supreme  Court  judge  of  the 
district  where  the  guarantor  resides,  that  said  guarantor  is  a  free- 
holder and  able  to  make  good  his  guaranty  together  with  a  certified 
check,  cash  or  New  York  draft  to  the  amount  of  ten  thousand 
dollars. 

Each  proposal  must  be  sealed  up  with  the  guaranty,  and  directed 
on  the  outside.  Proposal  for  Constitutional  Con  rent  inn  Printing, 
and  when  thus  sealed  and  directed  the  proposition  should  be  en- 
closed in  a  separate  envelope  and  directed  to  the  undersigned,  or 
either  of  them,  at  the  office  of  the  State  Comptroller  at  Albany, 
New  York. 


Doc.  No.  4  10 

Convention  Bills  or  Overtures 
Composition,  presswork,  paper,  etc.,   500  copies  of  each  four 

page  signature,  per  page Each  additional  100  copies,  per 

page . 

Convention  Calendars 
Composition,  presswork,  paper,  etc.,   500  copies  of  each  four 

page  signature,  per  page  .     Each  additional  100  copies,  per 

page . 

Documents,  Journals,  Etc. 
Composition,  presswork,  paper,  etc.,  500  copies  of  each  eight 
page  signature,  plain  matter,  per  page ;  rule  and  figure  mat- 
ter, per  page .    Each  additional  100  copies,  plain  matter,  per 

page ;  rule  and  figure  matter,  per  page  — — . 

Convention  Proceedings 
Composition,  presswork,  paper,  etc.,  500  copies  of  each  eight 

page  signature,  per  page .     Each  additional  100  copies,  per 

page . 

Binding  Journals,  Documents,   Etc. 

Binding  in  paper  covers,  per  copy  ■ .      Binding  in  cloth 

covers,  per  copy . 

No  extra  pay  will  be  allowed  for  corrections  or  alterations  in 

proof  sheets,  nor  will  any  additional  work  other  than  called  for 

herein  be  permitted  unless  approved  by  the  State  Printing  Board. 

It  is  further  expressly  understood  that  the  contract  to  be  entered 

into  as  aforesaid  shall  contain  the  stipulation  prescribed  in  section 

3  of  the  Labor  Law,  that  no  laborer,  workman  or  mechanic  in  the 

employ  of  the  contractor,  sub-contractor  or  other  person  doing  or 

contracting  to  do  the  whole  or  part  of  the  work  contemplated  by  the 

contract,  shall  be  permitted  or  required  to  work  more  than  eight 

hours  in  any  one  calendar  day,  except  in  cases  of  extraordinary 

emergency,  caused  by  fire  or  flood  or  danger  to  Life  or  property. 

The  Board  reserves  the  right  to  reject  any  or  all  bids. 

Dated,  Albany,  N.  Y.,  March  24,   L915. 

FRANCIS  M.  HUGO, 

Secretary  of  State. 
EUGENE  M.  TEAVIS, 

Comptroller. 
EGBURT  E.  WOODBURY, 

A  ttorney-General. 


11  Doc.  No.  4 


[copy] 


State  Printing  Board 
Comptroller's  Office 

Albany,  N.  Y.,  April  6,  1915 
To  the  Constitutional  Convention: 

Gentlemen. —  Pursuant  to  the  provisions  of  chapter  76  of  the 
Laws  of  1915  we  transmit  herewith  proposals,  which  we  have 
opened,  received  in  accordance  with  said  statute  for  the  printing 
of  the  documents,  journals  and  proceedings  of  the  Convention. 

As  directed  by  the  statute,  we  respectfully  recommend  that  the 
bid,  the  acceptance  of  which  we  consider  most  advantageous,  is 
that  of  the  J.  B.  Lyon  Company. 

hi  accordance  with  the  statute,  we  respectfully  submit  herewith 
a  blank  form  of  contract  with  our  recommendation,  for  the  use 
of  the  Convention  should  it  so  determine. 
All  of  which  is  respectfully  submitted. 
Francis  M.  Hugo, 

Secretary  of  State, 
Eugene  IT.  Travis, 

State  Comptroller, 
Egburt  E.  Woodbury, 

Attorney-General, 
Composing  the  Printing  Board  of  the  State  of  Xew  York. 


[copy] 

State  Printing  Board 
Comptroller's  Office 

Albany,  X.  Y.,  April  6,  1915 

To  the  Honorable  Constitutional  Convention  of  the  State  of  New 

York: 

Gentlemen. —  Acting  under  and  by  direction  of  chapter  TO  of 

the  Laws  of  1915,  this  Board  received  sealed  proposals  for  printing 

at  the  office  of  the  State  Comptroller,  Saturday,  April  3,  1915. 


Doc.  lSTo.  4  12 

These  were  opened  by  the  Board  at  12  o'clock  noon,  of  that  day. 
Attached  herewith  are  the  bids  for  the  work. 

As  directed  by  the  statute,  the  Board  recommends  that  the 
contract  be  awarded  to  J.  B.  Lyon  Company  of  Albany,  X.  Y., 
their  proposal  being  most  advantageous  to  the  State. 

Taking  the  work  performed  in  1891  as  a  basis,  the  estimated 
number  of  proceedings  printed  approximates  3,800  pages,  size 
of  our  sample.     The  result  on  proposals  received  is  as  follows : 

The  Argus  Company $16,720  25 

Brandow  Printing  Company 0,201  00 

J.  B.  Lyon  Company 7,790  00 


The  bills  and  calendars  totaled  three  volumes  each,  1,000  copies 

of  each  being  ordered;  therefore  the  result  per  1,000  copies  is 
per  page: 

Bills 

The  Argus  Company $2  85 

Brandow  Printing  Company 1   80 

J.  B.   Lyon  Company 155 

Calendars 

The  Argus   Company    $1   17 

Brandow  Printing  Company 3   02 

J.  B.  Lyon  Company   3  00 


The  documents  and  journals  approximate  1  volumes  of  1,000 
copies,  therefore  the  result  per  1,000  copies  is  as  follows  per 
page : 

Plain 

The  Argus   Company    ;  .  .  .  $3  65 

Brandow   Printing  Company    I    78 

J.  B.  Lyon  Company    1    70 

Rule  and  Figure 

The  Argus  ( lompany   $3  45 

Brandow    Printing    Company    2  8] 

J.  B.  Lyon  Company    3  00 


13  Doc.  No.  4 

While  the  Brandow  Printing  Company  are  a  trifle  lower  than 
the  J.  B.  Lyon  Company  on  the  rule  and  figure  composition, 
there  is  so  little  of  this  work  in  connection  with  the  whole 
proposition  that  the  result  would  not  be  material. 

Binding 
In  regard  to  binding,  the  Brandow  Printing  Company  bid  is 
the  same  as  the  J.  B.  Lyon  Company  on  paper  covers  and  one 
cent  lower  than  the  J.  B.  Lyon  Company  on  cloth  binding.  The 
lower  price  on  the  other  work  in  our  opinion  more  than  offsets  the 
difference. 

On  examination  of  the  volumes  in  the  library  we  nnd  the 
manual,  the  annotated  constitution,  the  subject  index  digest  and 
the  statistical  volume,  all  of  which  were  a  part  of  the  convention 
work  in  1894.  We  are  informed  that  this  work  is  already 
ordered  and  partly  completed  under  the  direction  of  the  Con- 
stitutional Convention  Commission.  The  major  portion  of  the 
work  therefore  will  consist  of  journals  and  proceedings,  for  which 
the  J.  B.  Lyon  Company  proposal  is  the  most  favorable. 

Undoubtedly  the  journals  and  proceedings  will  be  revised  and 
indexed  after  the  Convention  as  was  the  case  in  1S94  and  the 
price  per  page  would  govern  rather  than  the  price  per  extra 
copies. 

Respectfully  submitted, 

Francis  M.  Hugo, 

Secretary  of  State. 
Eugene  M.  Travis, 

Comptroller. 
Egburt  E.   Woodbury, 

Attorney-General, 
Composing  the  Printing  Board  of  the  State  of  New  York. 


Doc.  No.  4  14 

[copy] 

Mr.  Berri,  from  the  Committee  on  Printing,  submitted  the  fol- 
lowing report. 

To  the  Constitutional  Convention: 

The  undersigned  committee  respectfully  reports  that  it  has 
carefully  considered  the  report  and  recommendation  of  the  State 
Printing  Board,  with  the  accompanying  bids  and  papers  sub- 
mitted to  it  and  recommends  the  acceptance  of  the  bid  of  the 
J.  B.  Lyon  Company.  It  also  advises  the  execution  of  the  con- 
tract prepared  and  recommended  by  the  State  Printing  Board. 

We  further  recommend  that  until  further  orders  the  number 
of  copies  to  be  printed  shall  be  as  follows:  Of  the  Proceedings 
of  the  Convention  seven  hundred,  of  the  Journals,  Calendars, 
Documents  and  Proposed  Constitutional  Amendments,  five  hun- 
dred each. 


Dated  April  7,  1915. 

(Signed) 


William  Berri, 
Charles  H.  Belts, 
Charles  J.  Mereness, 
James  H.  Dahm, 
James  L.  Nixox, 
Samuel  H.   Beach. 


[copy] 

IN  CONSTITUTIONAL  CONVENTION, 

Albany,  N.  Y.,  April  7,  1915 
Mr.  Berri  offered  for  the  consideration  of  the  Convention  a 
resolution  in  the  words  following : 

Resolved,  That  the  State  Printing  Board  be  and  they  are 
hereby  authorized  to  execute  a  contract  for  the  printing  of  the 
journals,  documents  and  proceedings  of  the  Convention  pursuant 
to  the  recommendation  of  the  Committee  on  Printing  in  their 
report  made  April  7,  1915. 

Mr.  President  put  the  question  whether  the  Convention  would 
agree  to  said  resolution  and  it  was  determined  in  the  affirmative. 


15  Doc.  No.  4 

[Specimen  Pages  for  RecordJ 

STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


RECORD 

No.  133 


EVENING  SESSION 

Thursday  Evening,  Sept.  20,  1S94 

The  Constitutional  Convention  of  the  State  of  New  York  met  pursuant  to 
recess,  in  the  Capitol,  Albany,  N.  Y.,  Thursday,  Sept.  20,  at  8  p.  in. 

Second  Vice-President  Steele  called  the  Convention  to  order. 

Mr.  Cookinham  —  Mr.  President,  I  ask  consent  to  offer  two  resolutions. 

The  President  pro  tern  —  The  secretary  will  read  the  resolutions. 

The  secretary  read  the  resolutions  as  follows: 

Resolved,  That  a  committee  consisting  of  ten  delegates  be  appointed  by 
the  President  to  draft  an  address  to  the  people  of  the  State,  explanatory  of 
the  proposed  constitutional  amendments  to  be  submitted  to  the  popular  vote, 
and  that  the  President  be  ex  officio  chairman  of  such  committee;  also, 

Resolved,  That  the  Convention  adjourn  sine  die  on  Saturday,  September 
22,  at  12  o'clock  noon,  or  as  soon  thereafter  on  that  day  as  the  Constitu- 
tional amendments  then  adopted  can  be  read  and  the  revised  Constitution 
read,  adopted  as  a  whole,  and  signed  by  the  delegates. 

Mr.  Cookinham  —  I  ask  that  these  resolutions  lie  on  the  table. 

Mr.  Moore  —  Mr.  President,  I  desire  to  debate  both  of  those  resolutions. 

Mr.  Springweiler  —  Mr.  President,  I  offer  the  following  resolution: 

The  President  pro  tern  —  The  secretary  will  read  Mr.  Springweiler's 
resolution. 

The  secretary  read  the  resolution  of  Mr.  Springweiler  as  follows: 

Whereas,  The  wage-workers  of  this  State  have  petitioned  this  Conven- 
tion, through  many  thousand  citizens,  to  pass  the  co-employe  liability,  anti- 
conspiracy  and  anti-trust  amendments;  therefore  be  it 

Resolved,  That  this  Convention  will  not  adjourn  without  considering  these 
requests  and  passing  of  said  amendments. 


Doc.  lsTo.  4  16 

Mr.  I.  Sam  Johnson  —  Mr.  President,  a  point  of  order.  These  resolutions 
refer  to  the  business  of  this  day  and  every  other  day,  as  the  President  of 
this  Convention  has  often  ruled,  and  I  think  we  ought  to  consider  them  the 
moment  they  are  put  in  here. 

Mr.  McMillan  —  Mr.  President,  I  ask  for  a  roll-call  to  ascertain  whether 
there  is  a  quorum  or  not. 

The  secretary  called  the  roll,  and  it  was  announced  that  ninety-six  members 
were  present. 

Mr.  Tekulsky  —  Mr.  President,  I  would  like  to  offer  the  following  resolution. 

Mr.  Spencer  —  I  rise  to  a  point  of  order.  We  are  by  a  vote  of  the  Con- 
vention in  the  order  of  third  reading  of  bills,  and  as  I  understand  it  we  can- 
not depart  from  that  order  of  reading  while  there  is  any  work  before  the 
Convention,  without  a  vote  of  the  Convention. 

The  President  pro  tern  —  The  Chair  will  state  that  it  has  been  the  custom 
to  allow  a  few  moments  for  the  ordinary  business  of  the  Convention  at  each 
session. 

Mr.  Spencer  —  But,  Mr.  President,  some  of  these  resolutions  may  call  out 
debate  and  may  consume  the  whole  session. 

The  President  pro  tern  —  The  resolutions  giving  rise  to  debate  go  over, 
and,  therefore,  they  cannot  call  out  discussion. 

The  secretary  read  Mr.  Tekulsky's  resolution  as  follows: 

Resolved,  That  we  extend  this  evening  session  to  eleven  o'clock,  and  after 
disposing  of  the  printed  calendar  on  third  reading  of  bills  numbers  26,  27,  28 
and  29  we  return  to  general  order  number  48,  which  is  the  first  on  the 
calendar,  before  transacting  any  other  business. 

The  President  pro  tem  —  This  resolution  is  strictly  in  order  at  this  time. 

Mr.  Tekulsky  —  Mr.  President,  I  desire  that  the  Convention  shall  under- 
stand the  reasons  why  I  offer  this  resolution.  Last  week  Mr.  Hedges  offered 
a  resolution  that  we  adjourn  on  Saturday  until  Thursday  next,  and  debate 
arose  at  the  time  in  reference  to  the  adjournment.  The  question  was  asked, 
and  it  was  stated  by  Mr.  Hedges  and  by  Mr.  Root  and  others,  that  the  mo- 
tion for  adjournment  was  offered  in  good  faith,  that  they  intended  to  re- 
turn here  and  transact  the  business  that  was  before  the  house.  They  not 
only  said  they  would  transact  that  business,  but  they  laid  out  a  plan  of 
action,  naming  certain  bills  which  would  be  acted  upon.  They  have  not 
done  that,  but  the  leaders  have  entered  into  a  contract  or  some  scheme  or 
other  to  protect  the  thieves  and  gamblers  of  the  State  of  New  York ;  and  when 
they  reach  that  measure  in  reference  to  the  gambling  act.  the  gentleman 
then  moves  to  go  into  the  order  of  third  reading.  Now,  Mr.  President.  1 
don't  offer  this  for  buncomb,  I  offer  it  in  good  faith.  If  the  gentlemen,  or 
any  of  the  gamblers  that  he  represents,  can  name  me  one  man  in  the  State 
of  New  York  that  is  in  the  bookmaking  business  that  is  not  a  thief,  a  black- 
guard or  an  ex-convict,  I  will  withdraw  my  resolution.  I  say,  Mr.  Presi- 
dent, every  bookmaker  in  the  State  of  New  York,  no  matter  where  he 
comes  from,  is  nothing  else  but  an  ex-convict,  a  cracksman,  a  pick-pocket, 
a  thief  of  the  lowest  character,  and  these  men  come  here  and  desire  to 
shut  this  out  because  the  Legislature  of  a  few  years  ago  legalized  a  certain 
kind  of  gambling,  and  they  are  trying  to  protect  them.  Protect  who?  The 
king  of  the  Louisiana  lottery,  Mr.  Morris,  the  head  of  the  association,  who 


17  Doc.  No.  4 

[Specimen  Pages  for  Journal] 

STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


JOURNAL 

No,  9 


Albany,  1ST.  Y.,  Tuesday,  June  12,  1891 

The  Convention  met  pursuant  to  adjournment. 

Prayer  by  Rev.  A.  K.  Duff. 

The  journal  of  Friday,  June  eighth,  was  read  and  approved. 

Mr.  Barhite  offered  a  resolution  in  words  following : 

Whereas,  This  Convention  has  learned  of  the  death,  after  a  long 
and  painful  illness,  of  Mrs.  Levis,  wife  of  the  Hon.  Merton  E. 
Lewis,  Delegate  from  the  twenty-eighth -Senatorial  district;  now, 
therefore, 

Resolved,  That  we  tender  to  Mr.  Lewis,  in  this  hour  of  sorrow, 
our  heartfelt  sympathies ;  further 

Resolved,  That  the  secretary  be  directed  to  send  to  Mr.  Lewis 
a  copy  of  this  resolution. 

Mr.  President  put  the  question  whether  the  Convention  would 
agree  to  said  resolution,  and  it  was  unanimously  adopted  by  a 
rising  vote. 

Mr.  President  presented  a  number  of  memorials,  asking  that 
officers  and  employes  of  the  State  shall  be  selected  upon  merit. 

Referred  to  the  Committee  on  Legislature,  its  Powers  and 
Duties. 

Mr.  Carter  presented  the  memorial  of  the  Women's  Christian 
Temperance  Union,  of  Erie  county,  asking  the  extension  of  female 
suffrage. 

Referred  to  the  Committee  on  Suffrage. 


Doc.  No.  4  18 

Mr.  Barhite  presented  a  memorial,  asking  that  State  employes 
be  selected  upon  merit. 

Referred  to  the  Committee  on  Legislature,  its  Powers  and 
Duties. 

Mr.  McMillan  (by  request)  presented  two  memorials  on  the 
same  subject. 

Referred  to  the  Committee  on  Legislature,  its  Powers  and 
Duties. 

Mr.  Goodelle  presented  a  memorial  on  the  same  subject. 

Referred  to  the  Committee  on  Cities. 

Mr.  Francis  presented  four  petitions,  asking  for  State  inspec- 
tion of  certain  religious  institutions. 

Referred  to  the  Committee  on  Charities. 

Mr.  Tucker  presented  the  petition  of  citizens  of  New  York  city, 
in  favor  of  female  suffrage. 

Referred  to  the  Committee  on  Suffrage. 

Also,  a  petition  from  the  National  Christian  League  for  the 
promotion  of  social  purity,  on  the  same  subject. 

Referred  to  the  Committee  on  Suffrage. 

Mr.  W.  H.  Steele  presented  the  memorial  and  petition  of  the 
Oswego  Baptist  Association,  against  sectarian  appropriations. 

Referred  to  the  Committee  on  Charities. 

Mr.  Hedges  presented  a  petition,  asking  State  inspection  of 
certain  religious  institutions. 

Referred  to  the  Committee  on  Charities. 

Mr.  Countryman  presented  the  protest  of  citizens  of  Albany 
against  female  suffrage. 

Referred  to  the  Committee  on  Suffrage. 

Mr.  Hill  presented  the  petition  of  citizens  of  Erie  county,  in 
favor  of  woman  suffrage. 

Referred  to  the  Committee  on  Suffrage. 

Mr.  Blake  offered  a  resolution  in  words  following: 

Resolved,  That  the  Secretary  of  State  be  and  he  hereby  is 
directed  to  report  to  this  Convention,  on  or  before  the  25th  day 
of  June,  1894,  the  number  of  indictments  for  murder  in  the  first 
and  second  degrees  found  by  grand  juries  of  the  various  counties 
in  this  State,  from  January  1,  1880,  to  January  1,  1894,  and  the 
number  of  convictions  of  each  degree  had  upon  sue1!  indictments, 
including  picas  of  murder  in  the  second  degree1. 

Referred  to  the  Committee  on  Judiciary. 


19  Doc.  No.  4 

[Specimen  Pages  for  Documents] 

STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  9 


RULES 


CHAPTER  I 
Powers  axd  Duties  of  the  President  and  Vice-Presidents 

Rule  1.  The  president  shall  take  the  chair  each  day  at  the 
hour  to  which  the  Convention  shall  have  adjourned.  Ke  shall 
call  to  order,  and,  except  in  the  absence  of  a  quorum,  shall  pro- 
ceed to  business  in  the  manner  prescribed  by  these  rules. 

Rule  2.  He  shall  possess  the  powers  and  perforin  the  duties 
herein  prescribed,  viz. : 

1.  He  shall  preserve  order  and  decorum,  and,  in  debate,  shall 
prevent  personal  reflections,  and  confine  members  to  the  ques- 
tion under  discussion.  When  two  or  more  members  rise  at  the 
same  time,  he  shall  name  the  one  entitled  to  the  floor. 

2.  He  shall  decide  all  questions  of  order,  subject  to  appeal  to 
the  Convention.  On  every  appeal  he  shall  have  the  right,  in  his 
place,  to  assign  his  reason  for  his  decision.  In  case  of  such  appeal 
no  member  shall  speak  more  than  once. 

3.  He  shall  appoint  all  committees,  except  where  the  Conven- 
tion shall  otherwise  order. 

4.  He  may  substitute  any  member  to  perform  the  duties  of 


Doc.  Xo.  4  20 

the  chair  during  the  absence  or  inability  of  both  vice-presidents, 
but  for  no  longer  period  than  two  consecutive  legislative  days, 
except  by  special  consent  of  the  Convention. 

5.  When  the  Convention  shall  be  ready  to  go  into  committee 
of  the  whole,  he  shall  name  a  chairman  to  preside  therein,  subject 
to  right  of  committee  to  elect  its  own  chairman. 

6.  He  shall  certify  the  passage  of  all  amendments  by  the  Con- 
vention, with  the  date  thereof. 

7.  He  shall  designate  the  persons  who  shall  act  as  reporters 
for  the  public  press,  not  exceeding  thirty  in  number;  but  no 
reporter  shall  be  admitted  to  the  floor  who  is  not  an  authorized 
representative  of  a  daily  paper.  Such  reporters,  so  appointed, 
shall  be  entitled  to  such  seats  as  the  President  shall  designate,  and 
shall  have  the  right  to  pass  to  and  fro  from  such  seats  in  enter- 
ing or  leaving  the  Assembly  Chamber.  Xo  reporter  shall  appear 
before  any  of  the  committees  in  advocacy  of,  or  in  opposition  to, 
anything  under  consideration  before  such  committees.  A  viola- 
tion of  this  rule  will  be  sufficient  cause  for  the  removal  of  such 
reporter.     Removal  for  this  cause  shall  be  vested  in  the  president. 

8.  He  shall  not  be  required  to  vote  in  ordinary  proceed- 
ings, except  where  his  vote  would  be  decisive.  In  case  of  a 
tie  vote  the  question  shall  be  lost.  He  shall  have  general  con- 
trol, except  as  provided  by  rule  or  law,  of  the  Assembly  Chamber 
and  of  the  corridors  and  passages  in  that  part  of  the  Capitol 
assigned  to  the  use  of  the  Convention.  In  case  of  any  disturb- 
ance or  disorderly  conduct  in  the  galleries,  corridors  or  passages, 
he  shall  have  the  power  to  order  the  same  to  be  cleared,  and  may 
cause  any  person  guilty  of  such  disturbance  or  disorderly  con- 
duct to  be  brought  before  the  bar  of  the  Convention.  In  all  such 
cases  the  members  present  may  take  such  measures  as  they  shall 
deem  necessary  to  prevent  a  repetition  of  such  misconduct,  either 
by  the  infliction  of  censure  or  pecuniary  penalty,  as  they  may 
deem  best,  on  the  parties  thus  offending. 

9.  He  shall  also  be  ex  officio  member  and  chairman  of  the 
committee  on  rules. 

10.  In  the  absence  of  the  President,  or  his  inability  to  preside, 
his  duties  shall  devolve  upon  the  first  vice-president,  or,  if  lie 
also  be  absent,  upon  the  second  vice-president. 


21  Doc.  No.  4 

[Specimen  Pages  for  Proposed  Amendments] 

STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

No.  461 


IN  CONVENTION 

April  6,  1915 


Introduced  by  Mr.  J.  JOHNSON  as  a  substitute  for  sections  five 
and  six  of  general  order  number  thirteen,  printed  number  four 
hundred  and  fifty-one.     Ordered  printed  and  laid  on  the  table. 

PROPOSED    CONSTITUTIONAL   AMENDMENT 

To  amend  article  eight  of  the  constitution  by  the  addition  of 
new  section 

The  Delegates  of  the  People  of  the  State  of  New  York,  in 
Convention  assembled,  do  propose  as  follows: 

1  Section  — .  All  cities  are  classified  according  to  the  latest  state 

2  enumeration,  as  from  time  to  time  made,  as  follows:     The  first 

3  class  includes  all  cities  having  a  population  of  two  hundred  and 

4  fifty  thousand,  or  more ;  the  second  class,  all  cities  having  a  popu- 
6  lation  of  fifty   thousand  and  less  than   two  hundred   and   fifty 

6  thousand;  the  third  class,  all  other  cities.     Laws  relating  to  the 

7  property,  affairs  or  government  of  cities,  and  the  several  depart- 

8  ments  thereof,   are  divided  into  general  and  special  city  laws; 

9  general  city  laws  are  those  which  relate  to  all  the  cities  of  one  or 

10  more  classes;  special  city  laws  are  those  which  relate  to  a  single 

11  city,  or  to  less  than  all  the  cities  of  a  class.     Special  city  laws 

Xote  —  These  lines  are  twelve  point  spaced  in  original. 


Doc.  No.  4  22 

1  shall  not  be  passed  except  in  conformity  with  the  provisions  of 

2  this  section.     After  any  bill  for  a  special  city  law,  relating  to  a 

3  city,  has  been  passed  by  both  branches  of  the  legislature,   the 

4  house  in  which  it  originated  shall  immediately  transmit  a  cer- 

5  tified  copy  thereof  to  the  mayor  of  such  city,  and  within  fifteen 

6  days  thereafter  the  mayor  shall  return  such  bill  to  the  house  from 

7  which  it  was  sent,  with  his  certificate  thereon,  stating  whether 

8  the  city  has  or  has  not  accepted  the  same. 

9  In  every  city  of  the  first  class,  the  mayor,  and  in  every  other 

10  city,  the  mayor  and  the  legislative  body  thereof,  concurrently, 

11  shall  act  for  such  city  as  to  such  bill;  but  the  legislature  may 

12  provide  for  the  concurrence  of  the  legislative  body  in  cities  of  the 

13  first  class.     The  legislature  shall  provide  for  a  public  notice  and 

14  opportunity  for  a   public  hearing  concerning  any  such   bill   in 

15  every  city  to  which  it  relates,  before  action  thereon.     Such  a  bill, 

16  if  it  relates  to  more  than  one  city,  shall  be  transmitted  to  the 

17  mayor  of  each  city  to  which  it  relates,  and  shall  not  lie  deemed 

18  accepted,  unless  accepted,  as  here  provided,  by  every  such  city. 

19  Whenever  any  such  bill  is  accepted,  as  herein  provided,  it  shall 

20  be   subject,   as   are   other  bills,   to   the   action   of   the   governor. 

21  Whenever  any  such  bill  is  returned  without  the  acceptance  of  the 

22  city  or  cities  to  which  it  relates,  or  is  not  returned  within  such 

23  fifteen  days,    it    may,    nevertheless,    again    he    passed    by    both 

24  branches  of  the  legislature,  and  it  shall  then  be  subject,  as  are 

25  other  bills,  to  the  action  of  the  governor.     Tn  every  special  city 

26  law  which  has  been  accepted  by  the  city  or  cities  to  which  it 


Note  —  These  lines  are  twelve  point  spaced  in  original 


23 


Doc.  No.  4 


[Specimen  Pages  for  Calendar  1 

STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DAILY  CALENDAR 

No.  20 

Thursday,  August  16,  1894 
Unfinished  Business  on  General  Orders 


G.  0 

No. 

Printed  No. 

Int.  No.  i  By  whom  Introduced 

ABSTRACT  OF  TITLE 

Action 

2 

406 

99 

Mr.  Roche 

To  amend  article  3,  by  the 
addition  of  a  new  section, 
prohibiting    the    granting 
pensions     to     any     civil 
officers  or  employes. 

6 

364 

9 

Mr.  Alvord 

To  amend  section  7  of  article 
7,     relating     to     "Salt 
Springs." 

4 

381 

183 

Mr.  Hill 

To  amend  section  5  of  article 
2,  relating  to  the  manner 
of  elections. 

3 

11 

11  I  Mr.  McMillan.  ... 

| 

To    amend    section    16    of 
article  3,  relating  to  legis- 
lation. 

5 

421 

382 

Special  committee. 

Relative  to  the  transfer  of 
land  titles. 

7 

64 

64 

Mr.  Holls 

To  amend  section  4  of  article 
2,    relating    to    enforcing 
the  duty  of  voting. 

14 

378 

49 

Mr.  Mereness 

To  amend  article  3,  relating 
to  public  officers. 

13 

409 

369 

Committee          o  n 
Cities. 

Relating   to   home   rule  for 
cities. 

Recommitted   to 
Committee  re- 
taining    place 
on        General 
Orders. 

8 

260 

258 

Mr.  Lauterbach .  .  . 

To  amend  article  2,  relative 
to  suffrage. 

Doc.  No.  4  24 


[copy] 


FORM   OF   PROPOSAL   FOR   CONSTITUTIONAL   CON- 
VENTION PRINTING 

(Under  Chapter  76,  Laws  of  1915.) 

Albany,  N.  Y.,  April  9,  1915 
To  the  Honorable  Secretary  of  State,  Comptroller  and  Attorney- 
General: 

(Constituting  the  State  Printing  Board,  State  of  New  York.) 
J.  B.  Lyon  Company,  Albany,  N.  Y. : 

The  undersigned  propose  to  do  the  Constitutional  Convention 
printing  and  work  connected  therewith  for  the  State  of  New 
York,  at  the  prices  and  on  the  conditions  herein  named,  and  agree 
to  comply  fully  with  the  requirements  of  the  State  Printing  Law, 
and  in  quantity,  quality,  and  manner  set  forth,  described  and  pro- 
vided in  the  advertisement  or  notice  calling  for  proposals  for 
said  printing,  namely: 

Convention  Bills  or  Overtures 
Composition,   presswork,   paper,   etc.,    500   copies   of 

each  four  page  signature,  per  page $1  05 

Each  additional  100  copies,  per  page 10 

Convention  Calendars 
Composition,   presswork,   paper,    etc.,    500   copies  of 

each  four  page  signature,  per  page 2   50 

Each  additional  100  copies,  per  page 10 

Documents,  Journals,  Etc. 
Composition,   presswork,   paper,   etc.,    500   copies   of 

each  eight  page  signature,  plain  matter,  per  page.  .  1    iM) 

Rule  and  figure  matter,  per  page 2   50 

Each  additional  100  copies,  plain  matter,  per  page.  .  10 

Rule  and  figure  matter,  per  page 10 

Convention  Proceedings 
Composition,   presswork,   paper,   etc.,    500   copies   of 

each  eight  page  signature,  per  page 1   55 

Each  additional  100  copies,  per  page 10 


25  Doc.  No.  4 

Binding  Journals,  Documents,  Etc 

Binding  in  paper  covers,  per  copy $0  01 

Binding  in  cloth  covers,  per  copy 13 


For  engraving  on  stone,  steel  or  wood,  and  printing  maps,  plans 
and  illustrations  for  convention  documents,  the  price  to  be  paid, 
including  cutting,  folding  and  pasting  the  same,  shall  in  no  case 
exceed  the  lowest  rates  current  for  work  of  the  desired  quality  in 
Albany  and  New  York  city  at  the  time  said  work  may  be  done. 
It  is  understood  that  no  extra  pay  will  be  claimed  or  allowed  for 
any  corrections  or  alterations  in  proof  sheets.  And  the  right  to 
abrogate  or  annul  any  contract  made  in  pursuance  hereof,  for 
failure  or  nonperformance  on  the  part  of  said  person  or  firm,  is 
hereby  expressly  reserved  to  the  Secretary  of  State,  Comptroller 
and  Attorney-General. 

J.   B.   LYON   COMPANY, 

Chas.  M.  Winchester, 

Vice-President. 

I  hereby  guarantee  that  if  the  foregoing  bid  for  the  Consti- 
tutional Convention  printing  is  accepted  that  J.  B.  Lyon  Com- 
pany will  enter  into  a  contract  in  compliance  with  said  proposals, 
give  the  necessary  security,  and  make  due  and  proper  perform- 
ance of  said  contract. 

Wm.  Lyon. 
I  certify  that  the  above  guarantor  resides  in  the  city  of  Albany, 
N.  Y.,  is  a  freeholder,  and  able  to  make  good  his  guaranty. 

George  Addington, 
County  Judge  of  the  County  of  Albany. 


Note  — Under  the  provisions  of  Chapter  76,  Laws  of  1915,  a  certified  check 
on  some  state  or  national  hank  or  the  money,  to  the  amount  of  $10,000,  is 
required  to  accompany  each  bid. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.   5 


Proposed  Resolution  in  Regard  to  Woman  Suffrage,  Intro- 
duced by  Mr.  Parsons  and  referred  to  the  Committee 
on  Suffrage 


Whereas,  There  is  to  be  submitted  to  the  people  at  the  general 
election  in  this  year  an  amendment  to  section  1  of  article  II  of  the 
Constitution,  which  amendment  provides  for  woman  suffrage  and 
reads  as  follows: 

Section  1.  Resolved  (if  the  Assembly  concur),  That  section 
one  of  article  two  of  the  constitution  be  amended  to  read  as 
follows : 

Section  1.  Every  [male]  citizen  of  the  age  of  twenty-one  years, 
who  shall  have  been  a  citizen  for  ninety  days,  and  an  inhabitant 
of  this  state  one  year  next  preceding  an  election,  and  for  the 
last  four  months  a  resident  of  the  county  and  for  the  last 
thirty  days  a  resident  of  the  election  district  in  which  he  or  she 
may  offer  his  or  her  vote,  shall  be  entitled  to  vote  at  such  election 
in  the  election  district  of  which  he  or  she  shall  at  the  time  be  a 
resident,  and  not  elsewhere,  for  all  officers  that  now  are  or  here- 
after may  be  elective  by  the  people,  and  upon  all  questions  which 
may  be  submitted  to  the  vote  of  the  people,  provided  that  a  citizen 
by  marriage  shall  have  been  an  inhabitant  of  the  United  States 
for  five  years;  and  provided  that  in  time  of  war  no  elector  in  the 


Doc.  No.  5  2 

actual  military  service  of  the  state,  or  of  the  United  States,  in 
the  army  or  navy  thereof,  shall  be  deprived  of  his  or  her  vote  by 
reason  of  his  or  her  absence  from  such  election  district;  and  the 
legislature  shall  have  power  to  provide  the  manner  in  which  and 
the  time  and  place  at  which  such  absent  electors  may  vote,  and 
for  the  return  and  canvass  of  their  votes  in  the  election  districts 
in  which  they  respectively  reside. 

And  "Whereas,  By  virtue  of  section  3  of  article  XIV  of  the 
Constitution,  any  amendment  proposed  by  this  Convention  relat- 
ing to  the  same  subject  will  if  approved  be  deemed  to  supersede 
the  foregoing  amendment  proposed  by  the  Legislature  and  hence 
misunderstanding  and  confusion  may  arise, 

Now,  therefore,  in  order  to  avoid  misunderstanding  and  con- 
fusion and  to  provide  that  if  the  people  shall  by  a  majority  of 
the  electors  voting  thereon  approve  and  ratify  said  legislative 
amendment  the  same  shall  take  effect,  and  that  if  they  shall  not 
approve  and  ratify  the  same  woman  suffrage  shall  not  take 
effect,  it  is 

Resolved  (1),  That  the  Convention  do  not  submit  any  amend- 
ment relating  to  the  subject  of  woman  suffrage; 

(2)  That  the  Convention  do  not  submit  a  complete  section  1 
of  article  II  of  the  Constitution  or  any  substitute  therefor  as  part 
of  a  proposed  revised  Constitution ;  and 

(3)  That  if  the  Convention  shall  submit  any  other  amendment 
to  said  section  1  of  article  II  it  submit  the  same  in  such  a  manner 
that  neither  its  approval  and  ratification  by  the  people  nor  its 
failure  of  such  approval  and  ratification  shall  affect  the  deter- 
minative effect  of  the  aforesaid  popular  vote  on  the  said  legisla- 
tive amendment. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN   CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  6 


REPORT     OF     THE     CONSTITUTIONAL     CONVENTION 
COMMISSION   ON   ITS   WORK  TO   DATE 


May  10,  1015 

To  the  Delegates  to  the  Constitutional  Convention: 

Gentlemen. — The  Constitutional  Convention  Commission,  es- 
tablished by  Laws  of  1914,  chapter  261,  to  collect,  compile  and 
print  information  and  data  for  the  Constitutional  Convention  of 
1915,  submits  the  following  report  on  its  work  to  date.  The  prin- 
cipal reason  for  making  a  report  at  this  time  is  to  give  the  dele- 
gates accurate  and  definite  information  as  to  the  nature  and  scope 
of  the  material  which  is  still  to  be  supplied. 

On  November  30,  1914,  the  Commission  sent  a  circular  letter 
to  all  the  delegates  to  the  Constitutional  Convention  stating  what 
at  that  time  the  Commission  planned  to  supply.  A  copy  of  this 
circular  letter  is  annexed  to  this  report  and  made  a  part  thereof. 

Publication  No.  1 
The  material  which  was  to  be  contained  in  publication  number 
1  in  the  annexed  circular  letter,  namely,  the  full  text  of  all  the 
constitutions  of  this  State,  is  found  in  Volume  I  of  Lincoln's 
Constitutional  History,  which  has  been  supplied  by  this  Commis- 
sion to  all  deleo-ates.     This  volume  also  contains  the  constitution 


Doc.  No.  6  2 

of   the  United    States,    Magna    Charta,    and   other   fundamental 
documents  of  a  constitutional  character. 

Publication  No.  2 
Publication  number  2,  namely,  the  New  York  State  Constitu- 
tion Annotated,  has  been  prepared  in  two  parts.  Part  II,  contain- 
ing all  the  amendments  to  the  constitution  proposed  in  the  Legis- 
lature from  1895  to  1914  inclusive,  including  those  submitted  to 
the  people  and  adopted,  those  submitted  to  the  people  but  rejected, 
and  those  not  submitted  to  the  people,  was  sent  in  an  advance 
paper  edition  to  all  delegates  on  April  17,  1915.  Attention  is 
called  to  the  fact  that  this  part  gives  the  vote  on  all  amendments 
submitted  to  the  people.  Part  I  of  this  publication,  containing 
the  text  of  the  existing  constitution  with  notes,  is  off  the  press 
and  is  now  being  bound  with  Part  II.  The  complete  publication 
including  both  parts  will  be  supplied  to  the  delegates  on  Tues- 
day, May  25th.  Each  part  is  preceded  by  a  prefatory  note  which" 
fully  explains  its  purpose  and  scope. 

Publication  No.  3 
Publication  number  3,  a  subject-index  digest  of  all  the  48 
State  constitutions,  is  being  pushed  through  the  press  as  rapidly 
as  possible.  The  preparation  of  this  publication  was  an  ambitious 
undertaking  and  it  has  taken  somewhat  longer  than  the  Com- 
mission anticipated.  In  order  to  make  it  available  as  soon  as 
possible  to  the  delegates,  the  Commission  has  arranged  to  have 
thirty  sots  of  galley  proofs  arranged  and  classified  by  subjects 
and  supplied  to  the  Convention  Committee  on  Library  and  In- 
formation to  be  used  by  that  Committee  in  its  discretion.  The 
following  subjects  are  covered  by  the  galley  proofs  now  available' : 
Auditor  Lieutenant-Governor 

Attorney-General  Public  Lands 

Courts  (in  part)  Public  Officers 

Elections  Secretary  of  State 

Eminent  Domain  Taxation 

Impeachment  T  rcasurer 

Legislative  Proceedings  and  AYaters 

Legislature 


3  Doc.  No.  6 

The  other  subjects  indexed  will  be  supplied  to  the  Committee 
on  Library  and  Information  as  the  galleys  come  from  the  press. 
It  is  necessary  to  point  out  in  this  connection  that  these  galleys 
have  not  been  revised  and  there  may  be  some  mistakes  in  them. 
These  will  of  course  be  corrected  when  the  matter  is  put  in  page 
proof.  It  is  believed  that  this  volume  will  be  of  very  great  value 
to  the  delegates  and  much  more  useful  than  a.  reprint  of  all  the 
State  constitutions  would  have  been. 

Publication  No.  4 
The  information  referred  to  in  item  number  4  has  been  sup- 
plied in  the  publication  entitled  "  Government  of  the  State  of  New 
York;  a  description  of  its  organization  and  functions." 

Publication  No.  5 
Publication  number  5,  "  The  Revision  of  the  State  Constitu- 
tion," being  the  printed  proceedings  of  the  annual  meeting  of  the 
Academy  of  Political  Science  held  in  New  York  City  November 
19  and  20,  1914,  has  been  supplied  in  two  volumes. 


Publication  No.  6 

The  Commission  has  also  supplied  to  the  delegates  the  complete 
text  of  the  New  York  State  Constitution  as  amended  and  in  force 
today  in  a  publication  with  ample  margins,  wide  spaces  between 
lines  and  alternate  blank  pages.  The  form  of  this  publication  is 
designed  to  give  every  facility  for  indicating  possible  amendments 
and  for  making  memoranda  relating  to  matters  under  considera- 
tion. 

The  publications  which  will  be  supplied  to  the  delegates  in  the 
near  future  include  the  following: 

Publication  No.  7 
The  Government  of  the  City  of  New  York.  A  collection  of 
addresses  and  discussions  presented  at  a  series  of  conferences  held 
under  the  auspices  of  the  Academy  of  Political  Science  in  the 
city  of  New  York  with  the  cooperation  of  the  Bureau  of  Municipal 
Research,  the  Institute  of  Arts  and  Sciences  of  Columbia  Uni- 
versity, and  a  Citizens  Committee,  held  during  the  period  from 
April  7  to  April  30,  1915.     This  volume  contains  260  pages  and 


Doc.  Xo.   G  4 

comprises  articles  by  the  heads  of  the  leading  departments  of  the 
city  government,  setting  forth  the  problems  of  each  particular 
department,  what  has  been  accomplished  during  the  past  two  or 
three  years,  and  a  brief  outline  of  the  difficulties  confronting  any 
administration  of  the  city's  affairs.  The  subjects  treated  are  the 
following : 

"  The  Office  of  Mayor,"  by  John  Purroy  Mitchel. 
"  Public  Health  and  Sanitation,"  by  S.  S.  Goldwater. 

Discussion  by  John  J.  Murphy,  George  O'Hanlon  and 
Homer  Folks. 
"  Police  Administration,"  by  Arthur  Woods. 

Discussion  by  Clement  J.  Driscoll. 
"  Fire  Administration,"  by  Robert  Adamson. 

Discussion  by  Clement  J.  Driscoll. 
"  Charities   and   Correction,"   by   Katherine   B.    Davis   and 
John  A.   Kingsbury. 
Discussion  by  Edward  T.  Devine. 
"  Education,"  by  Thomas  W.  Churchill. 
Discussion  by  Clarence  E.   Meleney. 
"  Parks   and   Recreation,"    by    Cabot   Ward    and    C.    Ward 
Crampton. 
Discussion  by  Howard  Bradstreet  and  W.  B.  Van  Ingen. 
"  Financial    Administration,    Budget    and    Tax    Rate,"    by 
William  A.  Pendergast. 
Discussion  by  Thomas  W.  Lamont  and  E.  R.  A.  Selig- 
man. 
"  Register's    Office    of    New    York    County,"    by    John    J. 

Hopper. 
"  Highways,  Street  Cleaning  and  Public  Works,"  by  Douglas 
Mathewson. 
Discussion  by  John  T.    Fetherston,   Lewis  II.    Pounds 
and  Marcus  M.  Marks. 
"  The  Administrative  Organization  of  the  Courts,"  by  Wil- 
liam McAdoo. 
Discussion    by    William    L.    Ransom    and    George    W. 
Alger. 
"  The  City  Charter,"  by  George  McAneny. 

Discussion  bv   Thomas   I.    Parkinson   and   Richard   S. 
Childs. 
"  Transportation,  Port  and  Terminal   Facilities,"   by  John 
Purroy  Mitchel. 
Discussion  by  Richard   C.    Harrison   and   Edward   M. 
Bassett. 
This  publication  will  be  ready  for  the  delegates  May  25,  1915. 


5  Doc.  No.   6 

Publication  No.  8 
Another  publication  now  going  through  the  press  will  contain 
material  on  county  government  and  will  include  the  following 
items : 

1.  Descriptive  and  statistical  information  relative  to 
boards  of  supervisors  and  coroners  supplied  by  the  office  of 
the  State  Comptroller  in  the  form  of  tables.  These  tables 
will  show: 

a.  The  composition  and  representation  of  various 
boards  of  supervisors. 

1.     Number  of  members  from  cities  and  from 
towns  in  each  board. 

2.  The  average  representation  per  supervisor  in 
each  county  of  area  (square  mile),  property  valu- 
ation (equalized  valuation  of  the  several  counties 
of  the  State  as  fixed  by  the  Equalization  Com- 
mission) and  the  population  (for  county,  by  city 
supervisors,  by  town  supervisors  and  for  the  largest 
and  smallest  town   in  each  county). 

b.  Services  performed  by  boards  of  supervisors  in 
each  county ;  the  number  of  days  of  each  session ;  the 
number  of  days  for  which  supervisors  were  paid  for 
session  work ;  meeting  of  tax  commissioners,  and  meet- 
ing of  board  of  county  canvassers ;  and  total  number  of 
days'   services   paid   for  by   each   county. 

c.  Results  of  county  financing  by  the  boards  of 
supervisors,  as  shown  by  reports  of  the  treasurer  of  each 
county ;  the  surplus  or  deficiency  arising  from  the  trans- 
actions of  the  county  financed  by  and  under  the  control 
of  the  boards  of  supervisors. 

The  above  tables  incidentally  show : 

1.  The  gross  cost  of  general  government,  the 
items  of  revenue  in  reduction  thereof  and  the  net 
cost  of  the  general  government  of  each  county. 

2.  The  items  and  gross  cost  of  improvements, 
including  the  interest  on  construction  bonds;  the 
items  from  sales,  insurance  recoveries,  etc.,  prop- 
erly applicable  to  the  reduction  of  the  costs  of 
improvements,  and  the  net  cost  of  improvements. 

3.  The  items  and  gross  amount  of  indebtedness 
incurred  and  paid,  and  the  net  increase  or  decrease 
in  the  county  debt. 


Doc.  No.  G  6 

4.  The  items  and  gross  amount  received  as  con- 
tributions for  county  government  charges;  the 
items  and  gross  amount  contributed  by  the  county 
to  the  expenses  of  the  State  government  and  the 
government  of  other  municipal  subdivisions,  and 
the  net  excess  of  the  contributions  received  over 
the  contributions  made  or  vice  versa. 

5.  The  items  and  gross  amount  received  by  the 
treasurer  from  taxes;  the  items  and  gross  amount 
expended  by  the  treasurer  in  the  collection  thereof 
and   in  advances  and  refunds. 

6.  Minor  items  of  advance  made  during  the 
year  and  repaid  on  account  of  prior  advances ;  de- 
posits with  the  treasurer  and  deposits  of  previous 
years  repaid;  refunds  on  account  of  error. 

7.  Increase  or  decrease  in  cash  balance  arising 
from  the  transactions  of  the  year  with  a  distribu- 
tion to  the  State  funds ;  receipts  from  building- 
bonds  and  temporary  loans ;  receipts  from  highway 
bonds  and  loans ;  and  receipts  from  the  general 
county  funds. 

The  tables  show  nothing  in  regard  to  the  expenditures 
for  general  government,  except  the  gross  amount. 

d.  The    cost    of    supervision    of    county    finances    in 
gross,  per  capita  and  by  $1,000  of  valuation. 

As  an  incident  to  these  tables  there  will  be  shown : 

1.  The  amount  paid  for  supervisors'  compensa- 
tion distributed  to  salaries,  per  diem  compensation, 
committee  work,  extending  taxes,  copying  roll?;  and 
mileage. 

2.  The  expense  of  the  board  of  supervisors  dis- 
tributed to  authorized  clerks  and  employees,  emer- 
gency employees,  traveling  expenses  for  committee 
work,  stationery,  postage  and  office  incidentals,  tele- 
phone and  telegraph,  furniture  and  fixtures  for 
supervisors'  chambers  and  special  counsel. 

3.  Expenses  for  general  administrative  officers 
in  certain  counties  performing  duties  elsewhere 
performed  by  boards  of  supervisors  or  their  em- 
ployees, distributed  to  county  attorney,  county 
auditor,  county  comptroller,  purchasing  agent  and 
superintendent  of  buildings. 

e.  The  character  of  the  work  of  the  board  of  suiter- 
visors,  as  shown  by  the  cost  to  the  county  in  gross,  per 


7  Doc.  No.  6 

capita  and  by  $1,000  in  valuation,  for  that  portion  of 
the  county  government  exclusively  under  the  financial 
control  of  the  several  boards. 

The  facts  above  will  be  shown  under  five  class  head- 
ings grouping  counties  in  the  order  of  their  population. 

II.  A  detailed  statement  by  cities,  villages  and  super- 
visory districts  of  all  of  the  expenditures  for  public  educa- 
tion for  the  school  year  1913-14,  supplied  by  the  Department 
of  Education.  The  expenditures  are  subdivided  under  the 
following  headings : 

Salaries 

Superintendents 

Principals 

Teachers 

Men 

Women 
Janitors,  engineers,  etc. 
Libraries 

Text-books,  stationery  and  supplies 
Compulsory  attendance 
School  board  and  business  offices 
Transportation  of  pupils 
New  equipment  (apparatus  and  furniture) 
Repairing,   hiring,    insuring   and   improving   school- 
houses,  sites  and  outbuildings. 
New  buildings  and  schoolhouse  sites 
Fuel,  wTater,  light,  power,  janitor  supplies  and  other 

expenses  of  operation 
Bonded  indebtedness 

Principal 

Interest 
All  other  incidental  expenses. 

III.  Papers  read  at  the  First  Conference  for  Better 
County  Government,  held  at  Schenectady  in  November; 
1914.     These  papers  include  the  following: 

"  Some  Needs  to  be  Considered  in  Reconstructing 
County  Government,"  by  O.  G.  Cartwright,  Director 
of  the  Westchester  County  Research  Bureau. 

"  Administration  of  County  Charities,''  by  V.  Ever  it 
Macy,  Superintendent  of  the  Poor,  Westchester  County. 

"  Taxation  and  County  Government  in  New  York 
State,"  by  Henry  J.  Cookinham,  County  Attorney, 
Oneida   County. 


Doc.  No.  6  8 

"  The  County  Auditor,"  by  Geo.  S.  Buck,  Auditor, 
Erie  County. 

"  The  County  Judiciary,"  by  Herbert  Harley,  Secre- 
tary, American  Judicature  Society. 

"  The  Sheriff  and  a  State  Constabulary,"  by  Ernest 
Cawcroft,  Deputy  State  Treasurer,  Albany. 

"  The  County  Manager  Plan,"  by  Richard  S.  Childs, 
Secretary,  The  National  Short  Ballot  Association. 

"  Schenectady's  City-County  Plan,"  by  Benedict  Hat- 
maker,  Editor,  The  Schenectady  "  Union-Star." 

IV.  A  survey  furnished  by  the  Westchester  County  Re- 
search Bureau  of  the  lines  of  service  which  are  recognized 
in  the  laws  of  New  York  State  as  within  the  field  of  the 
governmental  functions  exercised  within  counties  by  county 
officers,  county  departments  or  county  councils,  and  included 
under  the  general  term  county  government;  followed  by  a 
condensed  description  of  the  governmental  organization  of 
the  county  of  Westchester. 
The  above  four  publications  will  be  included  in  one  volume  which 
is  being  pushed  through  the  press  as  rapidly  as  possible. 

Publication  No.  9 
A  critical  survey  of  the  State  government  prepared  under  the 
direction  of  the  Bureau  of  Municipal  Research  of  New  York  City 
and  based  upon  the  "  Government  of  the  State  of  New  York," 
the  publication  referred  to  in  the  first  part  of  this  report  No.  4 
which  has  already  been  supplied  to  delegates.  This  Commission 
believes  that  the  delegates  to  the  Constitutional  Convention  are 
entitled  to  all  the  light  obtainable  on  the  important  problems  be- 
fore it  and  will  transmit  this  critical  survey  to  the  delegates  in  the 
belief  that  the  criticisms  therein  contained,  unfavorable  as  well 
as  favorable,  will  be  of  substantial  assistance  to  the  delegates  in 
considering  possible  changes  in  the  organization  of  the  State 
government.  This  Commission  does  not,  however,  by  transmitting 
this  publication  to  the  delegates  necessarily  endorse  any  of  the 
suggestions  therein  contained. 


S3  Doc.    No.   6 

Publication  Xo.   10 

I.  A  report  on  the  organization  and  functions  of  the  govern- 
ment of  the  city  of  New  York.     This  report  will  include: 

a.  Graphic  charts  of  the  organization  of  each  department, 
bureau,  etc. 

b.  Summaries  and  supporting  schedules  for  each  depart- 
ment, bureau,  etc.,  showing. 

1.  Functions  of  each  organization  unit. 

2.  Titles  of  officers  and  employees. 

3.  Salary  or  other  compensation  of  each  employee. 

4.  Civil  service  classification  of  each  employee. 

5.  Duties  or  activities  of  each  employee. 

This  report  is  being  prepared  in  cooperation  with  the  city 
chamberlain,  the  commissioners  of  accounts  and  the  department 
of  financ  e. 

II.  A  report  in  summary  and  in  detail  setting  forth  the 
revenues  and  expenditures  of  each  department,  bureau,  etc.,  of  the 
city  of  Xew  York  for  each  year  from  1910  to  1914  inclusive. 
The  revenues  and  expenses  of  the  five  counties  embraced  within 
the  city  of  Xew  York  are  also  included. 

This  report  is  being  prepared  in  cooperation  with  the  depart- 
ment of  finance  and  the  commissioner  of  accounts. 

III.  A  report  on  the  organization  and  functions  of  the  five 
counties  within  the  city  of  Xew  York,  together  with  critical  com- 
ment relative  thereto.  The  organizations  will  be  set  forth  similarly 
to  those  included  in  the  report  on  Xew  YTork  City  and  the  critical 
data  will  be  in  both  summary  and  detailed  fomi.  This  report  is 
also  being  prepared  in  cooperation  with  the  city  chamberlain,  the 
commissioner  of  accounts  and  the  department  of  finance. 

IV.  A  report  on  the  organization  and  functions  of  Monroe 
county.  This  report  will  be  prepared  along  the  same  lines  as  the 
reports  noted  above.  The  work  is  being  done  by  the  Bureau  of 
Municipal  Research. 

V.  A  report  on  the  organization  and  functions  of  the  govern- 
ment of  the  city  of  Rochester,  Xew  York.  This  report  is  also  of 
the  same  character  as  those  noted  above  and  is  being  prepared  by 
the  Bureau  of  Municipal  Research.  As  Rochester  is  one  of  the 
three  first  class  cities  and  is  located  in  Monroe  county,  it  should 
afford  useful  information  to  the  convention  when  considered  with 
the  county  report. 


Doc.  No.  6  10 

VI.  A  report   on  the  organization  and  functions  of  Nassau 
county.     This  report  is  also  similar  to  those  above  noted.     It  is 
being  prepared  for  the  Nassau  county  commission. 
Respectfully  yours, 

Morgan  J.  O'Brien,  Chairman. 
Edward  Sciioeneck 
Thaddeus  C.  Sweet 
Samson  Laohman 
John  H.  Finley 

Copy  of  Circular  Letter  Sent  to  Delegates  to  the  Con- 
stitutional Convention 

Albany,  N.  Y.,  November  30,  1914 

Dear  Sir. — The  undersigned  Commission,  constituted  by  Laws 
of  1914,  chapter  261,  to  collect,  compile  and  print  information 
and  data  for  the  use  of  the  delegates  to  the  Constitutional  Con- 
vention of  1915,  is  desirous  of  obtaining  suggestions  as  to  the 
character  and  scope  of  the  publications  which  should  be  prepared, 
printed  and  supplied  primarily  for  the  use  of  the  delegates. 

Our  appropriation  is  limited  to  an  amount  insufficient  to  collect 
and  furnish  complete  data  on  all  the  subjects  that  may  be  con- 
sired  by  the  Convention  and  this  makes  it  all  the  more  desirable 
that  we  should  have  the  advice  and  aid  necessary  to  enable  us  to 
prepare  only  such  publications  as  will  unquestionably  be  useful 
in  the  study  and  consideration  of  the  more  important  topics. 

Owing  to  the  short  space  of  time  in  which  the  Commission  has 
to  do  its  work,  and  to  the  fact  that  work  on  some  publications 
must  be  begun  at  once  in  order  to  have  them  ready  before  the 
Convention  meets,  the  Commission  has  been  obliged  to  make 
immediate  provisions  for  certain  publications.  It  is  believed, 
however,  that  these  are  so  fundamental  in  scope  and  character 
that  there  will  be  no  dispute  as  to  the  propriety  of  publishing 
them.     They  are  as  follows: 

1.  The  full  text  of  all  the  Constitutions  of  this  State,  namely, 
the  Constitutions  of  1777,  1821,  184G;  the  Constitution  proposed 
by  the  Constitutional  Convention  of  18G7-G8,  but,  with  the  excep-' 
tion  of  the  judiciary  article,  rejected  by  the  people;  and  the  Con- 
stitution of  1894.  The  full  text  of  the  amendments  to  these 
Constitutions  will  be  given,  following  (lie  sections  amended.  It 
will  be  noticed  that  this  publication  will  give  the  full  text  of 
every  constitutional  provision  that  lias  been  in  force  in  this  State 


11  Doc.  No.  6 

at  any  time.  This  volume  will  probably  aso  contain  the  Constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States  and  certain  other  documents  which  have 
been  important  in  shaping  the  course  of  constitutional  develop- 
ment in  this  State,  as,  for  instance,  Magna  Charta  and  the  Charter 
of  Liberties  and  Privileges  passed  by  the  first  New  York  Legisla- 
ture, October  30,  1683.  The  Commission  will  be  pleased  to 
receive  suggestion  as  to  other  important  fundamental  documents 
of  this  character. 

2.  The  complete  text  of  the  existing  New  York  State  Consti- 
tution, annotated  as  follows : 

(a)  A  source  note  for  each  section,  showing  when  the 
section  first  became  a  part  of  the  Constitution  and  what 
changes,  if  any,  were  subsequently  made, 

(b)  An  exact  reference  to  the  pages  of  the  debates  and 
proceedings  of  the  State  Constitutional  Conventions  where 
the  subject-matter  of  the  section  has  been  discussed. 

(c)  An  exact  reference  to  the  pages  in  Lincoln's  Consti- 
tutional History  of  New  York,  published  in  five  volumes  in 
1906,  where  this  learned  commentator  has  discussed  the 
subject-matter  of  the  section.  Mr.  Lincoln's  work  constitutes 
such  an  exhaustive  study  and  exposition  of  constitutional 
development  in  this  State,  and  contains  such  a  wealth  of 
information  relating  thereto,  that  the  delegates  will  doubtless 
wish  to  refer  to  it  on  many  occasions.  The  Commission 
believes  that  these  annotations  will  very  greatly  facilitate  its 
use.  The  Commission  regrets  that  its  available  appropria- 
tion does  not  permit  it  to  send  a  copy  of  this  work  to  each 
delegate,  but  as  many  copies  as  possible  will  be  procured  for 
use  during  the  Convention. 

(d)  The  full  text  of  any  amendments  to  the  section 
proposed  by  the  Legislature  since  1894  but  not  adopted. 

3.  A  subject-index  digest  of  all  the  State  Constitutions.  A 
subject  classification,  with  main-heads  and  sub-heads,  is  being  pre- 
pared, comprehensive  enough  in  its  scope  to  include  within  it  an 
analysis  of  all  the  provisions  in  these'  State  Constitutions.  An 
exact  reference  by  article  and  section  will  be  given  to  each  con- 
stitutional provision  indexed,  and  the  substance  of  the  provision 
will  be  concisely  stated.  It  will  be  noticed  that  this  publica- 
tion will  not  only  be  an  index  to  all  the  State  Constitutions, 
but  will  also  serve  the  purpose  of  a  comparative  study  of  these 
Constitutions. 

4.  Certain  statistics  and  descriptive  statements  covering  the 
organization,  work  and  salary  expense  of  the  various  State  depart- 


Doc.  No.   6  12 

merits.  The  Commission  has  already  made  tentative  arrange- 
ments to  secure  a  report  which  it  believes  will  be  of  great  value 
and  usefulness  to  the  delegates.  Definite  announcement  of  this 
report  cannot,  however,  be  made  at  this  time. 

It  is  hoped  that  arrangements  can  also  be  made  to  secure  similar 
information  and  data  covering  at  least  some  aspects  of  city  and 
county  government. 

The  Commission  will  be  pleased  to  receive  suggestions  as  to 
the  specific  kind  of  information  and  data  along  these  lines  which 
the  delegates  deem  important  for  them  to  have. 

5.  The  Commission  has  also  arranged  to  secure  a  supply  of 
the  printed  proceedings  of  the  annual  meeting  of  the  Academy 
of  Political  Science  held  in  New  York  city  on  November  19  and 
20,  1914.  This  entire  meeting  was  given  up  to  the  consideration 
of  the  subject,  "  The  Kevision  of  State  Constitutions."  The  Com- 
mission believes  that  a  perusal  of  the  papers  read  at  this  meeting- 
will  throw  valuable  light  on  many  of  the  important  problems 
which  will  come  before  the  Convention. 

It  is  the  intention  of  the  Commission  to  place  in  the  Convention 
hall,  or  in  an  adjoining  room,  so  as  to  be  readily  accessible  to 
delegates  during  the  Convention  period,  many  works  bearing  upon 
the  political,  social  and  constitutional  development  of  this  State, 
among  which  will  be  the  publications  on  the  inclosed  list. 

We  shall  be  pleased  to  receive  from  you  any  suggestions  cover- 
ing the  work  of  the  Commission  which  you  think  will  enable  us 
to  be  of  real  and  substantial  service  to  the  delegates. 
Respectfully  yours, 

Morgan    J.    O'Brien,    Chairman 
Robert  F.   Wagner 
Thaddeus  C.   Sweet 
Samson  Lachmax 
John  H.  Finlev 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.   7 


SUPPLEMENTAL   REPORT   OF  CONSTITUTIONAL  CON- 
VENTION COMMISSION 


Referring  to  the  report  of  the  Constitutional  Convention  Com- 
mission, printed  as  Document  No.  6  of  the  Constitutional  Con- 
vention, this  Commission  begs  to  report  that  the  publications 
described  in  that  document  and  numbered  1,  4,  5  and  G,  were 
sent  to  the  home  or  office  addresses  of  the  delegates.  If  any  of 
these  publications  have  not  been  received  it  is  because  they  have, 
in  some  way  unknown  to  this  Commission,  miscarried. 

Publications  ISTos.  2  and  7  are  now  in  the  document  room  of 
the  Convention  where  the  delegates  can  procure  them  at  their 
convenience.  Each  delegate's  copy  bears  his  name  stamped  on 
the  cover. 

Publication  No.  9  will  be  distributed  in  proof  form  to-day  and 
bound  copies  will  be  ready  for  distribution  early  next  week. 

Every  effort  is  being  made  to  have  the  remaining  publications 
(ISTos.  3,  8  and  10)  ready  for  distribution  at  the  earliest  possible 
moment.  The  greater  part  of  these  three  publications  (two  of 
which  are  being  prepared  under  special  resolution  of  the  Conven- 
tion), is  already  in  type. 

Chapter  2G1  of  the  laws  of  1014,  which  established  this  Com- 


Doc.  No.  7  2 

mission,  after  directing  the  distribution  of  the  material  to  dele- 
gates, provides  that  "  such  commission  may,  in  its  discretion,  pro- 
vide for  the  circulation  and  distribution  of  such  matter  so  far  as 
practicable  among  other  persons  desiring  the  same  and  may  fix  a 
price  therefor  to  be  paid  by  persons  other  than  delegates  or  state 
or  municipal  officers,  which  price  shall  be  as  nearly  as  possible 
the  cost  to  the  State  of  the  material  sold.  *  *  *  Nothing 
herein  contained,  however,  shall  be  deemed  to  prevent  such  com- 
mission from  making  such  free  distribution  of  such  material  as 
may  be  feasible." 

Before  making  the  distribution  authorized  under  this  act,  the 
Commission  wishes  to  satisfy  fully  the  needs  of  all  the  delegates. 
It  therefore  requests  each  delegate  to  let  the  secretary  of  the  Com- 
mission know,  in  writing,  on  or  before  June  4th,  what  publica- 
tions, if  any,  he  desires  for  his  own  use  (describing  the  publi- 
cations by  the  numbers  given  in  document  No.  6).  After  these 
reports  have  been  received  from  the  delegates  the  Commission  will 
proceed  on  the  assumption  that  the  wants  of  the  delegates  have 
been  complied  with  and  will  be  at  liberty  to  distribute  the  remain- 
ing copies  in  accordance  with  the  directions  contained  in  Chapter 
261  of  the  laws  of  1914.  The  copies  for  distribution  by  sale  may 
be  obtained  from  the  Librarian,  Dr.  Charles  R.  Skinner,  in  the 
Legislative  Library,  to  which  place  communications  to  Mr.  Fred- 
erick D.  Colson,  Secretary  of  the  Commission,  may  be  addressed. 
It  is  necessary  to  point  out  that  the  Commission  is  not  in  a  posi- 
tion to  supply  any  additional  sets  of  Lincoln's  Constitutional  His- 
tory of  New  York  except  for  the  personal  use  of  the  delegates  to 
the  Convention  or  to  the  Convention  Committee.  It  is  further 
necessary  to  state  that  this  Commission  was  able  to  secure  only 
three  hundred  copies  of  publication  No.  4,  namely,  the  publica- 
tion entitled  "  Government  of  the  State  of  New  York;  a  descrip- 
tion of  its  organization  and  functions  "  and  of  these  three  hundred 
copies  only  about  fifty  remain  for  distribution. 
Respectfully, 

MORGAN  J.  O'BRIEN, 

Chairman, 
JOHN  II.  FINLEY, 
SAMSON    LAC 'II  MAN. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

NO.  8 


REPLY  OF  THE  CLERK  OF  THE  COURT  OF  APPEALS 
TO  RESOLUTION  OF  THE  CONVENTION 


May  28,  1915 

To  the  Secretary  of  the  Constitutional  Convention: 

Dear  Sir. —  T  beg  herewith  to  hand  you  the  answers  to  the 
questions  contained  in  the  resolution  of  the  Constitutional  Con- 
vention transmitted  to  me  on  May  6,  1915.  The  information  has 
been  largely  prepared  by  G.  Herbert  Cone,  the  law  clerk  of  the 
Court. 

Respectfully  yours, 

R.  M.  BARBER. 
QUESTION  1 

General   Subject-Matter   of   Causes 

(Note  to  this  Qitestion:  In  ascertain^  the  subject-matter  of  the  cases, 
regard  has  been  had,  except  in  a  few  instances,  to  the  general  nature  of  the 
question  involved,  rather  than  to  the  form  in  which  it  arose.  For  instance, 
many  questions  of  statutory  construction  and  constitutional  law  are  brought 
up  by  the  writs  of  mandamus,  certiorari  and  by  other  special  proceedings, 
but  as  a  rule  no  attention  has  been  paid  to  the  procedure  in  classifying  the 
litigations.  In  a  few  instances,  however,  where  the  procedure  and  nature  of 
the  question  were  so  closely  interwoven  that  the  procedure  adopted  would 
more  readily  identify  the  nature  of  the  question,  such  as  habeas  corpus,  quo 


Doc.  Ko. 


warranto,   replevin,   and  perhaps   in   a  few   other   instances,   such  cases  have 
been  thus  classified.) 


1913 
Negligence  : 

Master  and  servant 49 

Personal  injuries  to  third  par- 
ties        38 

Same  on  streets  and  highways.     10 

Damage  to  property 2 

Bv  automobiles   11 


1914 
Negligence: 

Master  and  servant 46 

Personal  injuries  to  third  par- 
ties        32 

Same  on  streets  and  highways.     10 

Damage  to  property 4 

Bv  automobiles   6 


Total    110 


Total 


98 


Cbimes 


Real  Property: 

Foreclosure     

Partition 

Trespass    

Mortgages  

Landlord  and  tenant . . 
Contracts  for  sale  of. 
General    


Crimes    53 


Real  Property: 

Foreclosure 

Partition 

Trespass    

Mortgages  

Landlord  and  tenant. 
Contracts  for  sale  of. 


( reneral    24 


Total    6: 


Total 


Contracts  : 

Purchase   and   sale 14 

Municipal  corporations    11 

Negotiable  instruments   16 

Partnership    8 

Bonds  and  undertakings S 

Insurance    13 

Personal  services 5 

Broker's  commissions 4 

General    29 


Contracts: 

Purchase   and   sale 14 

Municipal  corporations   10 

Negotiable  instruments   17 

Partnership    7 

Bonds  and  undertakings 12 

insurance     25 

Personal  services 8 

Broker's  commissions   6 

General    34 


Total 


108 


Condemnation    24 


DECEDENTS'    ESTATES    it 

(Including  accounting  of  rep- 
resentatives, probate  and 
const  ruction  of  wills,  claims, 
etc.) 


Total    13:$ 


Condemnation 


Decedents'  Estates   53 

(Including  accounting  of  rep- 
resentatives, probate  and 
construction  of  wills,  claims, 
etc.) 


Doc.  No.  8 


1913 

Taxes : 

General    9 

Transfer    6 

Franchise    - 

Special  franchise G 

Mortgage 2 

Total    23 

Matrimonial  Actions    8 

(Divorce.        annulment        and 
breach  of  promise.) 


Governmental  Functions  : 
Positions  in  public  service. 


Change  of  grade 5 

Liquor   tax    certificates 3 

Court  of  Claims 4 

Labor    laws    4 

Municipal     and     public    rights 

and  duties  generally 15 

Total    46 


Torts : 

Fraud  and  deceit 

Conversion    

Nuisance     

Libel    

Slander    

Alienation  of  affections. 
Malicious  prosecution  . 
False   imprisonment    .  .  . 

Civil  Rights  Law 

Unclassified    


1914 

Taxes  : 

General    14 

Transfer    7 

Franchise    5 

Special  franchise 3 

Total    29 

Matrimonial  Actions   5 

(Divorce    and   separation.) 


Governmental  Functions  : 
15  Positions  in  public  service.  .  .  . 

Change  of  grade 

Liquor  tax  certificates 

Court  of  Claims 

Municipal    and    public    rights 
and  duties  generally 


Total 


Torts : 

Fraud  and  deceit 2 

Conversion    6 

Nuisance   5 

Libel    2 

Civil  Rights  Law 3 

Unclassified    1 

Total    21 


Total    28 


Penalties 6      1 


Stockholders'  Liability 
Stock  Brokers   


enalties 


3  Stockholders'  Liability 

4  Stock  Brokers   


Doc.  No.  8 


1913 
Banks  and   Banking 


1914 
Banks  and   Banking 7 


Railroads     S      Railroads     

(Organizations.       construction  (Organization,  construction  and 

and  operation.)  operation.) 


Corporations : 

Dissolution    

Stock  and  stockholders. 
General   matters    


Corporations: 

3  Dissolution    4 

6  Stock  and  stockholders 6 

7  General   matters    S 


Total    16 


Total 


Attorneys  : 
Compensation 
Disbarment   .  . 


18 


Attorneys: 

7  Compensation   S 

1  Disbarment 3 


Total 


Carriers 


Ferry  Licenses 
Quo  Warranto 
Habeas  Corpus  . 


Prohibition,  Writ  of. 


Elections     (Political) 


Total 


4      Carriers 


3       Quo  Warranto 


4       Habeas   Corpus 


3       Elections    (Political) 


Replevin 


1       Replevin 


Attachment 


Patents 


Doc.  No.  8 


1913 

Fraudulent  Transfers 


1914 
2      Fraudulent  Transfers 


Jugdment  Creditor's  Action...        1       Jugdment  Creditor's  Action. 


Bankruptcy 


Mechanics'  Liens 


Membership  Association 


Contempt 


Executions 


Foreign  Judgments 


Gifts 


2      Bankruptcy    3 

i       Mechanics'  Liens   8 

Other    liens    1 

2      Membership  Association    1 

1       Contempt   J 


Supplementary  Proceedings  ...        1 


1       Gifts 


Arbitration 


Incompetent  Persons 


Trademarks 


1       Trade-Marks 


(Note  to  the  Foregoing:  There  would  perhaps  be  still  greater  uniformity 
shown  in  the  work  of  the  court  were  it  not  for  the  fact  that  during  the 
year  1913  three  weeks  of  the  regular  work  was  taken  up  with  the  impeach- 
ment trial.  This  will  account  for  a  slight  falling  off  in  the  number  of  cases 
disposed  of  during  1013.  as  shown  by  the  answer  to  Question  XI,  post,  and 
in  the  number  or  kinds  of  questions  presented  as  shown  in  the  foregoing 
table.) 


Doc.  No.  8  6 

QUESTION  2 

Number  of   Cases   Involving   Questions   of   Constitutional   Law 

1913  1914 

18  32 

QUESTION  3 

Number  of  Cases  Involving  the  Interpretation  of  General  Statutes 
of  This  State  and  of  the  United  States 

1913  1914 

182  203 

(Note  to  the  Above  :  In  calculating  these  cases,  we  have  excluded  the 
Statutes  of  Limitation  and  the  Statutes  of  Fraud,  and  also  the  Codes,  unless 
such  statutes  or  a  section  of  the  Code  was  the  actual  and  important  question 
involved  in  the  controversy,  which  was  the  situation  in  but  a  very  small 
number  of  cases.) 

QUESTION  4 
The  Number  of  Cases  Involving  Questions  of  Criminal  Law 

1913  1914 

53  57 

QUESTION  5 

The  Number  of  Cases  Involving  the  Interpretation  of  Municipal 
Charters 

1913  1914 

39  63 

(Note:  The  great  majority  of  these  cases  arose  over  the  construction  of 
the  Charter  of  Greater  New  York.) 

QUESTION  6 

The  Number  of  Cases  Involving  the  Interpretation  of  Wills 

1913  1914 

32  24 

QUESTION  7 
The  Number  of  Cases  in  Which  Appeals  Were  Allowed  by  the 
Several  Appellate  Divisions,  Pursuant  to  Section  190  of  the 
Code  of  Civil  Procedure,  and  that  He  State  Separately  the 
Number  of  Such  Cases  in  Which  Appeals  Were  so  Taken 
Under  Each  Subdivision  of  Said  Section 

1913  1914 

34  36 


7  Dor.  No.  8 

QUESTION  8 

The  Number  of  Cases  in  Which  Appeals  Were  Allowed  by  the 
Several  Appellate  Divisions,  Pursuant  to  Subdivision  2  of 
Section  191  of  the  Code  of  Civil  Procedure,  and  that  He  Slate 
Separately  the  Number  of  Such  Cases  in  Which  Appeals  Were 
so  Taken  Under  Each  Subdivision  of  Said  Section 

1913  1914 

Subdivision    1     4       Subdivision    1     5 

Subdivision    2    7       Subdivision    2    1 

QUESTION  9 

The  Number  of  Cases  in  Which  Appeals  Were  Allowed  by  a 
Judge  of  the  Court  of  Appeals,  Pursuant  to  Subdivision  2  of 
Section  191  of  the  Code  of  Civil  Procedure 

1913  1914 

7  3 

QUESTION  10 

The  Number  of  Cases  of  Appeal  Filed  with  the  Court  in  Which 
the  Decision  of  the  Appellate  Division  Was  Not  Unanimous 

1913  1914 

25 S  290 

(Note:  The  above  is  not  a  computation  from  the  "  cases  of  appeal  filed  with 
the  court  "  during  1913  and  1914,  but  from  the  cases  argued  during  these 
years.  That  was  the  basis  on  which  we  proceeded  in  answering  the  other 
questions,  and  we  have  assumed  that  you  wanted  these  figures  given  on  a 
uniform  basis.) 

QUESTION  11 

Total  Number  of  Cases  on  Appeal  Which  Had  Been  Placed  upon 
the  Calendar  but  Not  Reached  for  Argument  on  the  1st  of 
January  for  Each  Year  During  the  Past  Eive  Years 

January  1,  1911  (calendar  of  1909) 66 

January  1,  1912  (calendar  of  1910) 201 

January  1,  1913  (calendar  of  1912) 21S 

January  1,  1914  (calendar  of  1913) 351 

January  1.  1915  (calendar  of  1914) 640 

The  foregoing  figures  are  furnished  in  strict  pursuance  to  the 
request  of  the  Convention,  but  the  clerk  deems  it  proper  to  call 
attention  to  the  fact  that  they  are  not  significant  inasmuch  as  the 
calendars  are  not  made  up  with  reference  to  January  1st  at  all. 


Doc.  No.  8  S 

The   tables    annexed    will    probably    furnish    the    information 
which  the  Convention  desires  as  to  the  work  of  the  court. 

( lases  pending-  January  1,  1910 824 

Returns  on  Appeal  filed  for  the  year  l!»ll 763 

Returns  on  Appeal  filed  for  the  year  1012 74-1 

Returns  on  Appeal  filed  for  the  year  1913 774 

Returns  on  Appeal  filed  for  the  year  1914 795 

Returns  on  Appeal  filed  May  21,  1915 42 (5 

Total    Returns    filed    in    five    years,    four    months    and 

twenty-one  days    £,326 

Cases  argued  and  dismissed : 

For  the  year   1910 683 

For  the  year  1911 696 

For  the  year  1912 662 

For  the  year  1913 635 

For  the  year   1914 (iT'.i 

To  May  21,  1915 349 

Total  cases  disposed  of 3,704 

Total  number  of  Returns  filed 4,326 

Total  number  of  cases  disposed  of 3,704 

Total  number  of  cases  now  pending 622 


Respectfully  submitted, 

R.  M.  Barbkk, 
Clerk  <>f  tin1  Court  of  Appeals. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN   CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  9 


REPLY  OF  THE  STATE  COMPTROLLER  TO    RESOLU- 
TION OF  THE  CONVENTION 


State  of  New  Yoke: 
COMPTROLLER'S  OFFICE 

Albany,  May  29,  1915 
Hon.  William  D.  Cunningham,  Secretary,  Constitutional  Con- 
vention, Albany,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. —  Enclosed  please  find  specific  tables  showing  salary 
and  compensation  received  by  the  several  county  treasurers  in  this 
State  during  the  last  complete  fiscal  years  of  such  counties.  There 
are  also  shown  in  the  tables  the  expenses  of  such  offices  to  their 
respective  counties.  The  information  contained  in  these  tables  is 
taken  from  verified  reports  of  county  treasurers  filed  in  this  De- 
partment, with  the  exception  of  the  counties  of  Erie,  Monroe, 
Cortland,  Essex,  Seneca,  Yates  and  Schuyler.  For  those  seven 
counties  the  information  has  been  gathered  by  this  Department 
from  reports  of  county  treasurers  to  respective  boards  of  super- 


Doc.  No.  9  2 

visors,  supplemented  in  some  instances  by  personal  investigation 
and  reports  to  other  county  officers.  All  of  the  information,  how- 
ever, has  been  gathered  from  reliable  sources. 

In  a  few  counties  either  by  special  law  or  resolution  of  the 
Board  of  Supervisors  the  County  Treasurer  is  required  to  pay 
for  extra  clerk  hire  out  of  the  salary  and  compensation  allowed 
him.  In  other  counties  such  clerk  hire  is  paid  by  the  county  in 
addition  to  the  County  Treasurer's  salary.  To  make  the  table 
complete,  therefore,  we  show  the  full  cost  of  each  county 
treasurer's  office  to  his  county. 

The  following  statement  summarizes  the  expenses  of  these 
offices  throughout  the  entire  State. 

Summarized  Statement. 
The   following   statement    summarizes   the   expenses   of   these 

offices  for  the  State: 

Salaries $114,633  27 

Fees: 

Liquor  taxes $30,929  21 

Inheritance  taxes 32,438  69 

Bank  taxes   9,195  10 

State  taxes    7,302  14 

Court  and  trust  fund  fees 2,003  03 

Returned  tax  fees 3,340  25 

Total 85,108  42 

Total  treasurers'   compensation $199,841   69 

Expenses  for  clerks  and  assistants 107,739  32 

Incidental  office  expenses 46,003  00 

Total  cost  of  offices $353,584  41 


3  Doc.  No.  9 

Should  you  desire  further  information  than  is  contained  in 
these  tables,  I  shall  be  very  glad  to  furnish  it  within  a  reasonable 
time. 

Respectfully  yours, 

EUGENE  M.  TRAVIS, 

Comptroller. 


Doc.  No.  9 


COUNTY 

Salary  and  Compensation  and 


Class  I .  . 
Class  II 
Class  III 
Class  IV. 

Class  V., 

State.... 


Popula- 
tion 


1,095,252 
650,397 

1,297,143 
989,595 
314,344 


4,346,731 


Salary 

received  by 

treasurer 


$19,500  00 
19,875  00 
33,624  97 
27,658  30 
13,975  00 


SI  14, 


27 


Fees  Retained  by 


Liquor 
taxes  2 


Inherit- 
ance 
taxes • 


$11,617  74  SI  1,189  05 
15,557  29|  18,617  85 
3,754   18      2,631  79 


S30.929  21  832,438 


Bank 
taxes  4 


State 
taxes  5 


S2.005  14 

1,096  42 

1,644  2d 

3,474  82 

974  52 


*1,236  26 

3,308  40 

2,182  69 

574  79 


195  10    $7,302  14 


1  Counties  arranged  in  classes  by  population. 

'Liquor  Tax  Lav/,  §  11. 

»  Tax  Law.  §  237. 

*  Tax  Law,  §21.     Se3  ooinijn  of  Attorney-General,  Maj 


TREASURERS 

Expenses,  Fiscal  Year  1914 


Doc.  No.  9 


Treasurer 

Total 

compensation 
of  treasurer 

Expenses  for 
clerks  and 
assistants 

Incidental 

office 
expenses 

Total  cost 

of  office  to 

county 

Court 
and  trust 
fund  fees  6 

Returned 

tax  fees  7 

$21,505  14 
25,545  29 
01,972  68 
68,393  87 
22,424  71 

$48,696  67 

17,579  99 

32,120  06 

7,788  55 

1,554  45 

$12,617  06 
3,983  29 
13,274  89 
13,099  37 
3,028  39 

$82,818  87 
47,108  57 

107,307  63 
89,281  79 
27,007  55 

I 

$402  56 
507  62 

$2,935  05 
80  70 

II 

III 

189  93 

324  50 

V 

$2,003  03 

$3,340  25 

$199,841  69 

$107,739  72 

$46,003  00 

$353, 5S4  41 

State 

6  Tax  Law,  §  91.     See  opinion  of  Attorney-General,  May  6,  1912. 

6  Code  Civil  Procedure,  §  3321.     See  opinion  of  Attorney-General,  May  6,  1915 

7  Special  statutes  for  certain  counties. 


Doc.  No.  9 


COUNTY 

Salary  and  Compensation  and 


Populti 
tion 


Salary 

received  by 

treasurer 


Fees  Retained  by 


Liquor 
taxes 


Inherit- 
ance 
taxes       | 


Bank 
taxes 


Erie 

Monroe 

Westchester . 


1.  Onondaga. 

2.  Albany.  .  . 

3.  Oneida 

4.  Rensselaer. 


Totals. 


528,985  1        JSS.000  00! 

$2,005  14 

CLASS 

283,212 
283,055 

4,500  00 
10,000  ooj 

1,095,252 

$19,500  00 

200,298 
173,666 
154,157 
122,276 

$4,000  00 
5,000  00 
4,875  00 
6,000  00 

CLASS 

$715  78 

$758  01 

380  64 

650,397 

$19,875  00 

$1,096  42 

$1,236  26 

116,001 
105,126 
96,138 
92,036 
91,769 

89,005 
88,235 
87,661 
83,930 
83,362 

80,382 
78,809 
71,664 
67,106 
65,919 

$3,958  33 
3,500  00 
1,500  00 
2,500  00 
2,500  00 

1,500  00 
1,999  98 
3,750  00 
2,000  00 
3,500  00 

1,000  00 
2,500  00 
1,000  00 
2,000  00 
416  66 

$363  30 

CLASS 

2.  Chautauqua 

$2,824  69 

221   79 

4.   Niagara 

$464  79 

$7,401   89 
724  64 

233  49 

216  30 

61   80 

933  90 

7.  Schenectady 

386  67 

366  68 

3,786  00 

812  54 

284  46 

11.  Jefferson 

* 

578  82 

159  00 

298  80 

287  02 

13.  Oswego 

1,726  42 
1,265  85 
1,080  88 

1,816  39 
540  75 
126  56 

116  81 

205  05 

15.  Cattaraugus 

271   71 

202  39 

1,297,143 

$33,624  97 

$11,617  74 

$11,189  05 

$1,644  20 

$3,308  40 

1  Approximate.      Not  reported  by  items. 

2  Counsel,  $1,172.32;  shelving,  $1,704.00. 
*  Not  reported. 


TREASURERS 

Expenses,  Fiscal  Year,  1914  continued 


Doc.  No.  9 


Court 
and  trust 
fund  fees 


Returned 
tax  fees 


Total 
compensation 
of  treasurer 


Expenses  for 
clerks  and 

assistants 


Incidental 

office 
expenses 


Total  cost 

of  office  to 

county 


I 

1 

$7,005  14 
4,500  00 
10,000  00 

$29,785  26 
10,328  50 
8,582  91 

$5,323  50 
3,354  48 
3,939  08 

$42,113  90 
18,182  98 
22,521  99 

$21,505  14 

$48,696  67 

$12,617  06 

$82,818  87 

II 

$4,000  00 
9,394  87 
4,875  00 
7,275  42 

$5,580  00 
5,799  99 
2,000  00 

'4,200  00 

$732  15 

651  71 

304  21 

'  2,295  22 

$328  68 

$2,592  40 

15,846  57! 

73  88 

342  65 

13,770  641 

$402  56 

$2,935  05 

$25,545  29 

$17,579  99 

$3,983  29 

$47,108  57 

1 

$4,321  63 
3,500  00 
4,800  65 
2,964  79 

10,135  38 

3,374  84 
2,464  45 
4,289  67 
6,598  54 
3,784  46 

2,036  62 
2,787  02 
4,864  67 
3,806  60 
2,243  36 

$800  00 

$180  12 

1,200  73 

2  4,385  63 

1,575  49 

296  83 

222  52 
622  85 
469  66 
1,366  90 
834  83 

136  74 

$5,301  75 
4,700  73 

15,372  53 
6,190  28 

13,232  31 

3,897  36 
6,743  51 
6,409  33 
17,265  44 
4,619  29 

2,673  36 
5,164  52 
5,990  87 
6,224  24 
3,584  11 

1 

2 

$254  17 

6,186  25 
1,650  00 
2,800  10 

300  00 

3,656  21 
1,650  00 
9,300  00 

500  00 
2,377  50 

900  00 
1,500  00 

500  00 

* 

* 

6 
7 
8 
9 
10 

11 

* 
172  99 

$16  00 

* 

* 

* 

226  20 
915  64 
840  75 

13 
14 
15 

80  46 

64  70 

$507  62 

$80  70 

$61,972  68 

$32,120  06 

$13,274  89 

$107,367  63 

Doc.  No.  9 


Salary  and  Compensation  axd 


1.  Saratoga.  .  .  . 

2.  Montgomery . 

3.  Herkimer .  .  . 

4.  Chemung.  .  . 

5.  Ontario 


6.  Wayne 

7.  Clinton 

8.  Washington. 

9.  Otsego 

10.  Rockland .  .  . 


11.  Franklin.  . 

12.  Delaware .  . 

13.  Fuhon 

14.  Columbia. 

15.  Allegany.  .  . 

16.  Madison.  . 

17.  Livingston . 

18.  Genesee 

19.  Chenango.  . 

20.  Tompkins.. 

21.  Warren 

22.  Cortland..  . 


Salary 

received  by 

treasurer 


61,917 
57,567 
56,856 
54,662 
52,286 

50,179 
48,230 
47.77S 
47,216 
46,873 

45,717 
45,575 
44,534 
43,658 
41,412 

39,289 
38,037 
37,615 
35,575 
33,647 

32,223 

29,240 


$1,000  00 

1,200  00, 

999  97 i 

1,300  00 

3,000  00 

1,100  00 

1,000  00! 

458  33: 

600  00 

3,500  00 

1,200  00 
1,200  00 
1,200  00 
3,000  00 
1,000  00 

500  00 
1,000  00 
1,000  00 

800  00 
1,000  00 

1,000  00 
600  00 


$27,658  30 


Fees  Retaixed  by 


Liquor 
taxes 


722   12' 

703  16 

790  59 

433  80 

1,393  02 

i 

768  59 

81  74: 

916  38 

976  02 

122  62 

528  30 
536  611 

1,009  53 
261   50 


$15,557  29 


S877  00 

4,534  54 

713  84 

247  58 


652  00 
175  03 
681   69 
435 
4,506  63 

258  38 
62  01 
650  61 
1,446  63 
558  65 

294  00 
147  73 
342  80 
206  21 
537  94 

1,030  89 
257  71 


Bank 
taxes 


$120  11 
250  66 
241  09 
120  20 
118  07 

106  70 
118  06 
135  68 


74  00 

129  13 

147  55 
233  49 
136  61 
155  14 


147  23 
95  27 


$18,617  8.3,   S3, 474  Si 


State 
taxes 


CLASS 


206  95 
53  73 


98  00 
233  93 
160  70 

181  82 


84  35 
168  33 
137  15 


9S5  98  129  71 

59  97  182  95 


113  61 

129  82 


$2,182 


1.  Sullivan. . 

2.  Essex 

3.  Orleans .  .  . 

4.  Wyoming. 

5.  Greene. . . , 


Seneca. . 
Tioga... 
Lewis.  .  . 
Schohari 
Yates.  .. 


11.  Putnam.  . 

12.  Schuyler . 

13.  Hamilton. 


33 

8U.S 

I     $900 

00 

33 

158 

1,200 

00 

32 

DIM) 

1,775 

00 

31 

.880 

800 

00 

30 

214 

1,600 

00 

26 

972 

1,250 

00 

25 

liL'i 

650 

00 

24 

849 

850 

00 

23 

855 

500 

00 

18 

642 

650 

00 

14 

665 

1,800 

00 

14 

004 

500 

00 

4 

373 

1,500  00 

314 

344 

1  $13,975 

00 

727   28 
233   10 


575  35 
383  48 
416  79 
221  84 
4  50 

245  39 
52  05 


873  IS 
66  34 
429  59 
242  71 
435  72 

116  07 
235  10 
156  72 
142  78 
161  82 

521  91 

49  85 


$47  49 
54  16 
66  83 
63  44 
75  91 

415  30 
79  03 
27  14 
53  57 
46  31 

32  72 
12  82 


102  30 
87  73 
70  90 


*  Not  reported. 


Expanses,  Fiscal  Yeak,  1914  concluded 


Doc.  ^o.  9 


Treasurer 


Court 

anil  trust 
fund  fees 


Returned 
tax  fees 


Total 
compensation 
of  treasurer 


Expenses  for 
clerks  and 

assistants 


ncidental 

office 
expenses 


Total  cost 
of  office  to 

county 


IV 

$73  78 

37  28 

* 

36  75 

80  72 

70  37 
18  33 
75  08 

* 

94  43 

20  70 



* 

* 

9  36 

21  35 

$902  92 



$4,493  32 
7,772  53 
1,954  90 
3,500  24 
3,171  80 

2,753  01 
2,225  66 
2,336  97 
1,671  28 
9,655  47 

2,436  82 
1,561  67 
3,103  16 
5,802  67 
1,973  56 

2,532  42 
1,948  02 
2,352  33 
1,381  32 
1,767  64 

2,919  47 
1,079  61 


.$2,100  00 
735  00 


220  00 
1,500  00 


19  74 

650  00 


§1,900  34 

1,259  64 

565  69 


781  59 

881  26 
397  10 
217  53 
830  94 
1,048  90 


1,369  26 
259  50 

384  27 
380  24 
1,112  54 
189  42 
149  37 

678 
81  50 


$6,393  66 
9,032  17 
2,520  59 
5.000  24 
4,688  39 

4,127  53 
2.C22  7C 
2,554  50 
2.S72  77 
11,704  37 

3,3S9  46 
1,620  40 
3,323  16 
8,671  93 
2,233  06 

2,936  43 

2,978  26 
3,464  87 
1,870  74 
1,917  01 


V 

$62  06 

1 

$2,076  83 
1,320  50 
3,236  50 
1,339  25 
2,111  63 

2,459  02 

1,435  34 

1,540  48 

934  93 

939  87 

2,915  64 

614  72 

1,500  00 

$499  98 
18667 

$379  34 
428  28 
744  60 

$2,956  15 
1,748  78 
4,167  77 
1,339  25 

2.833  84 

2,459  02 
1,600  34 
1,920  38 
1,124  06 
1,054  87 

3,027  59 
941  20 

1.834  30 

1 

17  OS 

$84  00 

3 

* 

550  00 

172  21 

5 

6 
7 
8 
9 
10 

11 
12 
13 

* 

* 

17'80 

300  00 

165  00 
379  90 
189  13 
115  00 

111  95 
308  68 
34  30 

18  93 

16  74 

75  12 

* 
240  50 

* 

$189  93 

$324  50 

$22,424  71 

$1,554  45 

$3,028  39 

$27,007  55 

STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN   CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  10 


AMENDED  RULES 


CHAPTER  I 
Powers  and  Duties  of  the  President  and  Vice-Presidents 

Rule  1.  The  President  shall  take  the  chair  each  day  at  the 
hour  to  which  the  Convention  shall  have  adjourned.  He  shall 
call  to  order,  and,  except  in  the  absence  of  a  quorum,  shall  proceed 
to  business  in  the  manner  prescribed  by  these  rules. 

Rule  2.  He  shall  possess  the  powers  and  perform  the  duties 
herein  prescribed,  viz. : 

1.  He  shall  preserve  order  and  decorum,  and,  in  debate,  shall 
prevent  personal  reflections,  and  confine  members  to  the  question 
under  discussion.  When  two  or  more  members  rise  at  the  same 
time,  he  shall  name  the  one  entitled  to  the  floor. 

2.  He  shall  decide  all  questions  of  order,  subject  to  appeal  to 
the  Convention.  On  every  appeal  he  shall  have  the  right,  in  his 
place,  to  assign  his  reason  for  his  decision.  In  case  of  such  appeal 
no  member  shall  speak  more  than  once. 


Doc.  No.   10  2 

3.  He  shall  appoint  all  committees,  except  where  the  Convention 
shall  otherwise  order. 

4.  He  may  substitute  any  member  to  perform  the  duties  of  the 
chair  during  the  absence  or  inability  of  both  vice-presidents,  but 
for  no  longer  period  than  two  consecutive  legislative  days,  except 
by  special  consent  of  the  Convention. 

5.  When  the  Convention  shall  be  ready  to  go  into  Committee 
of  the  Whole,  he  shall  name  a  chairman  to  preside  therein,  subject 
to  right  of  the  committee  to  elect  its  own  chairman. 

G.  He  shall  certify  the  passage  of  all  amendments  by  the  Con- 
vention, with  the  date  thereof. 

7.  He  shall  designate  the  persons  who  shall  act  as  reporters  for 
the  public  press,  not  exceeding  thirty  in  number ;  but  no  reporter 
shall  be  admitted  to  the  floor  who  is  not  an  authorized  representa- 
tive of  a  daily  paper.  Such  reporters,  so  appointed,  shall  be 
entitled  to  such  seats  as  the  President  shall  designate,  and  shall 
have  the  right  to  pass  to  and  fro  from  such  seats  in  entering  or 
leaving  the  Assembly  Chamber.  JNTo  reporter  shall  appear  before 
any  of  the  committees  in  advocacy  of,  or  in  opposition  to,  anything 
under  consideration  before  such  committees.  A,  violation  of  this 
rule  will  be  sufficient  cause  for  the  removal  of  such  reporter. 
Removal  for  this  cause  shall  be  vested  in  the  President. 

8.  He  shall  not  be  required  to  vote  in  ordinary  proceedings, 
except  where  his  vote  would  be  decisive.  In  case  of  a  tie  vote  the 
question  shall  be  lost.  He  shall  have  general  control,  except  as 
provided  by  rule  or  law,  of  the  Assembly  Chamber  and  of  the 
corridors  and  passages  in  that  part  of  the  Capitol  assigned  to  the 
use  of  the  Convention.  In  case  of  any  disturbance  or  disorderly 
conduct  in  the  galleries,  corridors  or  passages,  he  shall  have  the 
power  to  order  the  same  to  be  cleared,  and  may  cause  any  person 
guilty  of  such  disturbance  or  disorderly  conduct  to  be  brought 
before  the  bar  of  the  Convention.  In  all  such  cases  the  members 
present  may  take  such  measures  as  they  shall  deem  necessary  to 
prevent  a  repetition  of  such  misconduct,  either  by  the  infliction  of 
censure  or  pecuniary  penalty,  as  they  may  deem  best,  on  the 
parties  thus  offending. 

0.  He  shall  also  be  ex-offlcio  member  and  chairman  of  the  Com- 
mittee on  Rules. 


3  Doc.  No.  10 

10.  In  the  absence  of  the  President,  or  his  inability  to  preside, 
his  duties  shall  devolve  upon  the  First  Vice-President,  or,  if  he 
also  be  absent,  upon  the  Second  Vice-President. 

The  President  and  Vice-Presidents  shall  be  consulting  mem- 
bers, without  vote,  in  the  several  committees  to  which  they  shall 
not  have  been  specifically  appointed. 

CHAPTER  II 
Order  of  Business 
Rule  3.  The  first  business  of  each  day's  session  shall  be  the 
reading*  of  the  Journal  of  the  preceding  day,  and  the  correction 
of  any  errors  that  may  be  found  to  exist  therein.  Immediately 
thereafter,  except  on  days  and  at  times  set  apart  for  the  considera- 
tion of  special  orders,  the  order  of  business  shall  be  as  follows : 

1.  Presentation  of  memorials.  Under  which  head  shall  be 
included  petitions,  remonstrances  and  communications  from  indi- 
viduals, and  from  public  bodies. 

2.  Communications  from  the  Governor  and  other  State  officers. 
Under  this  head  shall  be  embraced  also  communications  from 
public  officers  and  from  corporations  in  response  to  calls  for 
information. 

3.  Notices,  motions  and  resolutions,  to  be  called  for  by  districts, 
numerically. 

4.  Propositions  for  constitutional  amendment,  by  districts,  in 
numerical  order. 

5.  Reports  of  standing  committees  in  the  order  stated  in  Rule 
15. 

6.  Reports  of  select  committees. 

7.  Third  reading  of  proposed  constitutional  amendments. 

8.  Unfinished  business  of  general  orders. 

9.  Special  orders. 

10.  General  orders. 

Reports  from  the  Committee  on  Revision  and  Engrossment  may 
be  received  under  any  order  of  business. 

CHAPTER  III 
Rights  and  Duties  of  Members 

Rule  4.  Petitions,  memorials,  remonstrances  and  any  other 
papers   addressed  to  the  Convention  shall  be  presented  by  the 


Doc.  No.   10  4 

President,  or  by  any  member  in  his  place,  read  by  their  titles, 
unless  otherwise  ordered,  and  referred  to  the  proper  committee. 

Rule  5.  Every  member  presenting  a  paper  shall  indorse  the 
same;  if  a  petition,  memorial,  remonstrance  or  communication  in 
answer  to  a  call  for  information,  with  a  concise  statement  of  its 
subject,  and  his  name;  if  a  notice  or  resolution,  with  his  name; 
if  a  proposition  for  constitutional  amendment,  with  a  statement 
of  its  title  and  his  name;  if  a  proposition  of  any  oilier  kind  for 
the  consideration  of  the  Convention,  with  a  statement  of  its 
subject,  the  proposer's  name,  and  the  reference,  if  any,  desired. 
A  report  of  a  committee  must  be  indorsed  with  a  statement  of 
such  report,  together  with  the  name  of  the  committee  making  the' 
same,  and  shall  be  signed  by  the  chairman.  A  report  by  a 
minority  of  any  committee  shall  be  signed  by  the  members  ren- 
dering the  same. 

Rule  6.  Every  member  who  shall  be  within  the  bar  of  the  Con- 
vention, when  a  question  is  stated  from  the  chair,  shall  vote  thereon 
unless  he  be  excused  by  the  Convention,  or  unless  he  be  directly 
interested  in  the  question ;  nor  shall  the  roll  of  absentees  be  more 
than  once  called.  The  bar  of  the  Convention  shall  be  deemed  to 
include  the  body  of  the  Convention  chamber. 

Rule  7.  Any  member  requesting  to  be  excused  from  voting  may 
make,  when  his  name  is  called,  a  brief  statement  of  the  reasons  for 
making  such  request,  not  exceeding  three  minutes  in  time,  and  the 
Convention,  without  debate,  shall  decide  if  it  will  grant  such 
request;  or  any  member  may  explain  his  vote,  for  not  exceeding 
three  minutes ;  but  nothing  in  this  rule  contained  shall  abridge  the 
right  of  any  member  to  record  his  vote  on  any  question  previous 
to  the  announcement  of  the  result. 

CHAPTER  IV 
Order  and  Decorum 
Rule  8.  No  member  rising  to  debate,  to  give  a  notice,  make  a 
motion,  or  present  a  paper  of  any  kind,  shall  proceed  until  he  shall 
have  addressed  the  President  and  been  recognized  by  him  as  en- 
titled to  the  floor.  While  the  President  is  putting  a  question  or  a 
count  is  being  had,  no  member  shall  speak  or  leave  his  place;  and 
while  a  member  is  speaking  no  member  shall  entertain  any  private 
discourse  or  pass  between  him  and  the  Chair. 


5  Doc.  No.  10 

Rule  9.  When  a  motion  to  adjourn,  or  for  recess,  shall  be 
carried,  no  member  or  officer  shall  leave  his  place  till  the  adjourn- 
ment or  recess  shall  be  declared  by  the  President. 

Rule  10.  No  persons,  except  members  of  the  Convention  and 
officers  thereof,  shall  be  permitted  within  the  Secretary's  desk, 
or  the  rooms  set  apart  for  the  use  of  the  Secretary,  during  the 
session  of  the  Convention,  and  no  member  or  other  person  shall 
visit  or  remain  by  the  Secretary's  table  while  the  yeas  and  nays 
are  being  called,  except  officers  of  the  Convention  in  the  discharge 
of  their  duties. 

CHAPTER  V 
Order  of  Debate 

Rule  11.  Xo  member  shall  speak  more  than  once  on  the  same 
question  until  every  member  desiring  to  speak  on  such  question 
shall  have  spoken ;  nor  more  than  twice  on  any  question  without 
leave  of  the  Convention. 

Rule  12.  If  any  member,  in  speaking,  transgress  the  rules  of 
the  Convention,  the  President  shall,  or  any  member  may,  call  to 
order,  in  which  case  the  member  so  called  to  order  shall  immedi- 
ately sit  down,  and  shall  not  rise  unless  to  explain  or  proceed  in 
order. 

Rule  13.  All  questions  relating  to  the  priority  of  one  question 
or  subject-matter  over  another,  under  the  same  order  of  business, 
the  postponement  of  any  special  order,  or  the  suspension  of  any 
rule,  shall  be  decided  without  debate. 

Rule  14.  All  questions  of  order,  as  they  shall  occur,  with  the 
decisions  thereon,  shall  be  entered  in  the  Journal,  and  at  the  close 
of  the  day's  session  a  statement  of  all  such  questions  and  decisions 
shall  be  printed  at  the  close  of  and  as  an  appendix  to  the  Journal. 

CHAPTER  VI 
Committees  and  Their  Duties 

Rule  15.  The  President  shall  appoint  the  following  standing 
committees  to  report  upon  the  subjects  named  and  such  others 
as  may  be  referred  to  them,  viz. : 

1.  On  the  bill  of  rights,  to  consist  of  eleven  members. 

2.  On  the  Legislature,  its  organization,  and  the  number,  appor- 
tionment, election,  tenure  of  office  and  compensation  of  its  mem- 
bers, to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 


Doc.  No.  10  6 

3.  On  the  powers,  limitations  and  duties  of  the  Legislature, 
except  as  to  matters  otherwise  referred,  to  consist  of  seventeen 
members. 

4.  On  the  right  of  suffrage  and  the  qualifications  to  hold  office, 
to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

5.  On  the  Governor  and  other  State  officers,  their  election  or 
appointment,  tenure  of  office,  compensation,  powers  and  duties, 
except  as  otherwise  referred,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

6.  On  the  judiciary,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

7.  On  the  State  finances,  revenues,  expenditures,  and  restric- 
tions on  the  powers  of  the  Legislature  in  respect  thereto,  and  to 
public  indebtedness,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

8.  On  cities,  their  organization,  government  and  powers,  to 
consist  of  seventeen  members. 

9.  On  canals,  to  consist  of  eleven  members. 

10.  On  public  utilities,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

11.  On  counties,  towns  and  villages,  their  organization,  govern- 
ment and  powers,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

12.  On  county,  town  and  village  officers,  other  than  judicial, 
their  election  or  appointment,  tenure  of  office,  compensation, 
powers  and  duties,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

13.  On  State  prisons  and  penitentiaries,  and  the  prevention 
and  punishment  of  crime,  to  consist  of  eleven  members. 

14.  On  corporations  and  institutions,  not  otherwise  herein 
specified,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

15.  On  currency,  banking  and  insurance,  to  consist  of  eleven 
members. 

16.  On  the  militia  and  military  affairs,  to  consist  of  seven 
members. 

17.  On  education  and  the  funds  relating  thereto,  to  consist  of 
seventeen  members. 

18.  On  charities  and  charitable  institutions,  to  consist  o\  sev- 
enteen members. 

19.  On  industrial  interests  and  relations,  except  those  already 
referred,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

20.  On  the  conservation  of  the  natural  resources  of  the  State, 
to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

21.  On  Hie  relations  of  the  State  to  the  Indians  residing  therein, 
to  consist  of  seven  members. 


7  Doc.  No.  10 

22.  On  future  amendments  and  revisions  of  the  Constitution, 
to  consist  of  seven  members. 

23.  Revision  and  engrossment,  to  consist  of  seven  members. 

24.  Privileges  and  elections,  to  consist  of  eleven  members. 

25.  Printing,  to  consist  of  seven  members. 

26.  Contingent  expenses,  to  consist  of  seven  members. 

27.  Rules,  to  consist  of  seven  members,  and  the  President. 

28.  On  the  civil  service,  to  consist  of  eleven  members. 

29.  On  library  and  information. 

30.  On  taxation,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

Rule  16.  The  several  committees  shall  consider  and  report, 
without  unnecessary  delay,  upon  the  respective  matters  referred 
to  them  by  the  Convention.  No  favorable  or  adverse  report  by 
any  committee,  upon  a  proposed  constitutional  amendment,  shall 
he  made  except  by  a  majority  of  all  the  members  of  the  committee. 
A  minority  of  a  committee  may  express  its  views  in  a  report. 

Rule  17.  The  Committee  on  Revision  and  Engrossment  shall 
examine  and  correct  the  constitutional  amendments  which  are 
referred  to  it,  for  the  purpose  of  avoiding  inaccuracies,  repeti- 
tions and  inconsistencies.  It  shall  also  carefully  examine  in  the 
order  in  which  they  shall  be  directed  by  the  Convention  to  be 
engrossed  for  a  third  reading,  all  constitutional  amendments  so 
engrossed,  and  see  that  the  same  are  correctly  engrossed,  and  shall 
immediately  report  the  same  in  like  order  to  the  Convention  before 
they  are  read  the  third  time. 

Rule  18.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Committee  on  Printing  to 
examine  and  report  on  all  questions  of  printing  referred  to  them ; 
to  examine  from  time  to  time,  and  ascertain  whether  the  prices 
charged  for  printing,  and  the  quantities  and  qualities  furnished, 
are  in  conformity  to  the  orders  of  the  Convention  and  to  the  con- 
ditions fixed  by  it ;  to  ascertain  and  report  the  number  of  copies 
to  be  printed,  and  how  distributed ;  and  to  report  to  the  Conven- 
tion from  time  to  time,  any  measures  they  may  deem  useful  for 
the  economical  and  proper  management  of  the  Convention 
printing. 

Rule  19.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Committee  on  Contingent 
Expenses  to  inquire  into  the  expenditures  of  the  Convention,  and 
whether  the  same  are  being  or  have  been  made  in  conformity  to 
law  and  the  orders  of  the  Convention,  and  whether  proper  vouchers 


Doc.  No.  10  8 

exist  for  the  same,  and  whether  the  funds  provided  for  the  purpose 
are  economically  applied,  and  to  report,  from  time  to  time,  such 
regulations  as  may  conduce  to  economy  and  secure  the  faithful 
disbursement  of  the  money  appropriated  by  law. 

CHAPTER  VII 
General  Orders  and  Special  Orders 

Rule  20.  The  matters  referred  to  the  Committee  of  the  Whole 
Convention  shall  constitute  the  general  orders,  and  their  titles 
shall  be  recorded  in  a  calendar  kept  for  that  purpose  by  the  Sec- 
retary, in  the  order  in  which  they  shall  be  severally  referred. 

Rule  21.  The  business  of  the  general  orders  shall  be  taken  up 
in  the  following  manner,  viz. :  The  Secretary  shall  announce  the 
title  of  each  proposed  amendment  or  other  matter,  as  it  shall  be 
reached  in  its  order,  whereupon  it  shall  be  taken  up  on  the  call 
of  any  member,  without  the  putting  of  a  question  therefor,  but 
if  not  so  moved,  it  shall  lose  its  precedence  for  the  day.  And 
whenever  three  proposed  amendments  or  other  matters  have  been 
thus  moved  the  Convention  shall  go  into  Committee  of  the  Whole 
upon  them  without  further  order. 

Rule  22.  Tuesday  and  Thursday  of  each  week  shall  be  set  apart 
especially  for  the  consideration  of  the  general  orders ;  but  they 
may  be  considered  on  any  other  day  when  reached  in  their  order. 

Rule  23.  Each  member  shall  be  furnished  daily  with  a  printed 
list  of  the  general  orders,  which  shall  be  kept  on  his  files  by  the 
Sergeant- at-Arms,  in  the  same  manner  as  other  printed  documents. 

Rule  24.  Any  matter  may  be  made  a  special  order  for  any  par- 
ticular day,  by  the  acceptance  of  the  report  of  the  Committee  on 
Rules,  or  by  a  two-thirds  vote,  or  by  unanimous  consent. 

CHAPTER  VIII 
Committee  of  the  Whole 

Rule  25.  Any  matter  may  be  committed  to  the  Committee  of 
the  Whole  upon  the  report  of  a  standing  or  select  committee,  or 
by  unanimous  consent  at  any  time.  Any  committee  may  be  dis- 
charged from  the  further  consideration  of  any  matter  referred  to 
it,  and  such  matter  may  then  be  referred  to  the  Committee  of  the 


9  Doc.  No.  10 

Whole,  by  a  vote  of  the  Convention.  The  same  rules  shall  be  ob- 
served in  the  Committee  of  the  Whole  as  in  the  Convention,  so  far 
as  the  same  are  applicable,  except  that  the  previous  question  shall 
not  apply,  nor  the  yeas  and  nays  be  taken,  nor  a  limit  be  made 
as  to  the  number  of  times  of  speaking. 

Rule  20.  A  motion  to  "  rise  and  report  progress  "  shall  be  in 
order  at  any  stage,  and  shall  be  decided  without  debate.  A,  mo- 
tion to  rise  and  report  is  not  in  order  until  each  section  and  the 
title  have  been  considered,  unless  the  limit  of  time  has  expired. 

Rule  27.  Proposed  Constitutional  amendments  and  other  mat- 
ters shall  be  considered  in  Committee  of  the  Whole  in  the  follow- 
ing manner,  viz. :  They  shall  be  first  read  through,  if  the  commit- 
tee so  direct ;  otherwise  they  shall  be  read  and  considered  by  sec- 
tions. When  the  limit  of  time  has  expired,  the  amendments  which 
have  been  proposed  and  not  previously  acted  upon  shall  be  voted 
upon  in  their  order  without  further  debate.  The  proposed  con- 
stitutional amendment  as  amended  shall  then  be  voted  upon  with- 
out debate,  and  the  committee  shall  then  rise  and  report  in 
accordance  with  the  action  which  it  has  taken. 

If  the  committee  shall  have  adopted  any  proposed  Constitutional 
amendment,  the  same  shall  be  reported  complete  with  any  amend- 
ments made  in  the  committee  incorporated  in  their  proper  places. 

Rule  28.  If  at  any  time,  when  in  Committee  of  the  Whole,  it 
be  ascertained  that  there  is  no  quorum,  the  chairman  shall  im- 
mediately report  the  fact  to  the  President,  who  then  takes  the  chair 
for  the  purpose  of  securing  a  quorum,  and  when  that  is  obtained 
the  chairman  resumes  his  duties. 

Rule  29.  Should  the  committee  not  have  completed  the  business 
before  it  rises,  the  chairman  will  report  progress  and  ask  leave  to 
sit  again. 

CHAPTER  IX 
Proposed   Amendments   to   the    Constitution 

Rule  30.  Xo  proposition  for  Constitutional  amendment  shall  be 
introduced  in  the  Convention  except  in  one  of  the  following 
modes,  viz. : 

1.  Under  the  order  of  introduction  of  propositions  for  consti- 
tutional amendment  by  districts,  in  numerical  order. 

2.  By  report  of  a  committee. 


Doc.  No.  10  10 

Rule  31.  The  title  of  each  proposition  for  Constitutional  amend- 
ment introduced  shall  state  concisely  its  subject-matter.  Matter 
which  it  is  proposed  to  strike  out  shall  be  in  brackets,  and  new 
matter  shall  be  underscored  and  when  printed  shall  be  in  italics. 
All  proposed  amendments  shall  be  presented  in  duplicate. 

Rule  32.  All  propositions  for  Constitutional  amendment,  after 
their  second  reading,  which  shall  be  by  title,  shall  be  referred  to 
a  standing  or  select  committee,  to  consider  and  report  thereon, 
and  shall  be  immediately  printed  and  placed  on  the  tiles  of  each 
member.  All  proposed  Constitutional  amendments  reported  shall, 
if  the  report  be  agreed  to,  be  committed  to  the  Committee  of  the 
Whole  and  immediately  printed.  When  a  committee  has  reported 
that  no  amendment  should  be  made  to  the  provisions  of  the  existing 
Constitution  relating  to  any  specified  subject,  and  such  report  is 
agreed  to,  all  propositions  for  Constitutional  amendment  relating 
to  that  subject  which  have  been  referred  to  that  committee  shall 
be  considered  as  rejected.  All  Constitutional  amendments  pro- 
posed by  a  minority  report  from  any  committee  shall  be  printed 
and  placed  on  the  files  of  the  members  of  the  Convention. 

Rule  33.  Proposed  Constitutional  amendments  reported  by  the 
Committee  of  the  Whole  shall  be  subject  to  debate  before  the  ques- 
tion to  agree  with  the  committee  on  their  report  is  put. 

Rule  31.  No  proposed  Constitutional  amendment  shall  be  or- 
dered to  a  third  reading  until  it  shall  have  been  considered  in 
Committee  of  the  Whole. 

Rule  35.  No  proposed  Constitutional  amendment  shall  be  put 
upon  third  reading  until  it  shall  have  been  reported  by  the  Com- 
mittee on  Revision  and  Engrossment  as  correctly  revised  and  en- 
grossed, unless  by  unanimous  consent.  Nor  shall  any  proposed 
Constitutional  amendment  be  read  the  third  time,  unless  it  shall 
have  been  once  printed. 

Rule  :;('..  Every  proposed  Constitutional  amendment  shall  re- 
ceive three  separate  readings,  previous  to  its  final  passage,  and 
the  third  reading  shall  be  on  a  day  subsequent  bo  that  on  which 
the  proposed  Constitutional  amendment  passed  in  Committee  of 
the  Whole. 


11  Doc.  No.   10 

Rule  37.  The  third  reading  of  proposed  Constitutional  amend- 
ments shall  take  place  in  the  order  in  which  they  have  been  or- 
dered to  a  third  reading-,  unless  the  Convention,  by  a  vote  of  two- 
thirds  of  the  members  present,  direct  otherwise,  or  the  proposed 
Constitutional  amendment  to  be  read  is  laid  on  the  table.  Ami 
the  question  on  the  final  passage  of  every  proposed  Constitutional 
amendment  shall  be  taken  immediately  after  such  third  reading, 
and  without  debate,  but  the  vote  on  the  final  passage  of  every  pro- 
posed amendment,  revision  or  addition  to  the  Constitution  shall 
be  taken  by  ayes  and  nays,  which  shall  be  entered  on  the  Journal. 

Rule  38.  In  all  cases  where  unanimous  consent  is  asked  for 
advancing  a  proposed  Constitutional  amendment  out  of  its  order, 
it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  President  to  plainly  announce  such 
request  in  full  twice. 

Rule  39.  On  the  third  reading  of  a  proposed  Constitutional 
amendment,  after  the  reading  of  the  title,  and  before  the  reading 
of  the  text,  the  proposed  Constitutional  amendment  shall  be  open 
one  hour,  if  required,  for  debate  on  its  merits,  before  the  previous 
question  shall  be  ordered ;  but  no  member  shall  speak  more  than 
five  minutes  or  more  than  once;  the  vote,  however,  may  be  taken 
at  any  time  when  the  debate  is  closed. 

Rule  40.  On  the  third  reading  of  the  proposed  Constitutional 
amendment,  no  amendment  thereto  shall  be  in  order,  except  to  fill 
blanks,  without  unanimous  consent. 

Rule  41.  A  motion  may  be  made  during  the  third  reading  of 
any  proposed  Constitutional  amendment  to  recommit  it,  and  such 
motion  shall  not  be  debatable. 

Rule  42.  A  register  shall  be  kept  by  the  Secretary  of  all  pro- 
posed Constitutional  amendments  introduced  in  the  Convention, 
in  which  shall  be  recorded,  under  appropriate  heads,  the  progress 
of  such  proposed  Constitutional  amendments  from  the  date  of 
their  introduction  to  the  time  of  their  final  disposition. 

Rule  43.  In  all  cases  where  a  proposed  Constitutional  amend- 
ment, order,  motion  or  resolution  shall  be  entered  on  the  Journal, 
the  name  of  the  member  introducing  or  moving  the  same  shall  also 
be  entered  on  the  Journal. 


Doc.  Xo.   10 


12 


CHAPTER  X 
Motions  and  Their  Precedence 
Rule  44.  When  a  question  is  under  consideration,  the  following 
motions  only  shall  be  received ;  which  motions  shall  have  prece- 
dence in  the  order  stated,  viz. : 
Motions  to,  or  for: 

1.  Adjourn  for  the  day. 

2.  Recess. 

3.  Call  of  the  Convention. 

4.  Previous  question. 

5.  Lay  on  the  table. 

6.  Postpone  indefinitely,  not  amendable,  but  debatable 

7.  Postpone  to  a  certain  day. 

8.  Go  into  Committee  of  the  Whole. 

9.  Commit  to  Committee  of  the  Whole 

10.  Commit  to  a  standing  committee. 

11.  Commit  to  a  select  committee. 

12.  Amend. 


>Xot  amendable  or  debatable. 


Preclude  debates  on 
main  question. 


Rule  45.  Every  motion  or  resolution  shall  be  stated  by  the 
President  or  read  by  the  Secretary  before  debate,  and  again,  if 
requested  by  any  member,  immediately  before  putting  the  ques- 
tion ;  and  every  motion,  except  those  specified  in  subdivisions  1  to 
11,  inclusive,  of  rule  44,  shall  be  reduced  to  writing  if  the  Presi- 
dent or  any  member  request  it. 

Rule  4G.  After  a  motion  shall  be  stated  by  the  President,  it 
shall  be  deemed  in  the  possession  of  the  Convention,  but  may  be 
withdrawn  at  any  time  before  it  shall  be  decided  or  amended. 

Rule  47.  The  motion  to  adjourn,  to  take  a  recess,  and  to  ad- 
journ for  a  longer  period  than  one  day,  shall  always  be  in  order; 
but  the  latter  motion  shall  not  preclude  debate. 

Rule  48.  A  motion  to  reconsider  any  vote  must  be  made  on 
the  same  day  on  which  the  vote  proposed  to  be  reconsidered  was 
taken,  or  on  the  legislative  day  next  succeeding,  and  by  a  member 
who  voted  in  the  majority,  except  to  reconsider  a  vote  on  the  final 
passage  of  a  proposed  Constitutional  amendment,  which  shall  be 


13  Doc.  No.   10 

privileged  to  any  member.  Such  motion  may  be  made  under  any 
order  of  business,  but  shall  be  considered  only  under  the  order  of 
business  in  which  the  vote  proposed  to  be  reconsidered  occurred. 
When  a  motion  for  reconsideration  is  decided,  that  decision  shall 
not  be  reconsidered,  and  no  question  shall  be  twice  reconsidered; 
nor  shall  any  vote  be  reconsidered  upon  either  of  the  following 
motions: 

'To  adjourn. 

To  lay  on  the  table. 

To  take  from  the  table ;  or 

For  the  previous  question. 

Rule  49.  ISTo  amendment  to  a  motion  shall  be  received  while 
another  is  pending,  unless  it  be  an  amendment  to  the  amendment 
and  germane  to  the  subject. 

CHAPTER  XI 
Of  Resolutions 

Rule  50.  The  following  classes  of  resolutions  shall  lie  over  one 
day  for  consideration,  after  which  they  may  be  called  up,  as  of 
course,  under  their  appropriate  order  of  business : 

1.  Resolutions  giving  rise  to  debate,  except  such  as  shall  relate 
to  the  disposition  of  business  immediately  before  the  Convention, 
to  the  business  of  the  day  on  which  they  may  be-  offered  or  to 
adjournments  or  recesses,  shall  lie  over  one  day  for  consideration, 
after  which  they  may  be  called  up,  as  of  course,  under  their 
appropriate  order  of  business. 

2.  Resolutions  containing  calls  for  information  from  any  of  the 
executive  departments,  from  State,  county  or  municipal  officers,  or 
from  any  corporate  bodies,  shall  be  referred  to  the  appropriate 
committee.  Such  committee  shall  report  thereon  within  three 
legislative  days. 

Rule  51.  All  resolutions  for  the  printing  of  an  extra  number 
of  documents  shall  be  referred,  as  of  course,  to  the  standing  Com- 
mittee on  Printing,  for  their  report  thereon  before  final  action  by 
the  Convention. 

Rule  52.  All  resolutions  authorizing  or  contemplating  expendi- 
tures for  the  purposes  of  the  Convention  shall  be  referred  to  the 
standing  Committee  on  Contingent  Expenses,  for  their  report 
thereon  before  final  action  bv  the  Convention. 


Doc.  iSTo.   10  14 

CHAPTER  XII 
The  Previous  Question 
Rule  53.  The  "previous  question"  shall  be  put  as  follows: 
"Shall  the  main  question  now  be  put?  "  and  until  it  is  decided, 
shall  preclude  all  amendments  or  debate.  When,  on  taking  the 
previous  question,  the  Convention  shall  decide  that  the  main  ques- 
tion shall  not  now  be  put,  the  main  question  shall  be  considered 
as  still  remaining  under  debate.  The  "  main  question  "  shall  be 
on  the  passage  of  the  proposed  amendment  to  the  Constitution, 
resolution  or  other  matter  under  consideration,  but  when  amend- 
ments thereto  are  pending,  the  question  shall  first  be  taken  upon 
such  amendments  in  their  order,  and  when  adopted  in  Committee 
of  the  Whole,  and  not  acted  on  in  the  Convention,  the  question 
shall  be  taken  upon  such  amendments  in  like  order. 

CHAPTER  XIII 
The  Convention  Chamber  and  Privileges  of  Admission  to  the 

Floor 
Rule  54.   The  following  classes  of  persons,  besides  officers  and 
members  of  the  Convention,  shall  be  entitled  to  admission  to  the 
floor  of  the  Convention  during  the  session  thereof,  viz. : 

1.  Governor,  Lieutenant-Governor,  and  ex-Governors  of  the 
State. 

2.  Judges  of  the  Court  of  Appeals  and  of  the  Supreme  Court. 

3.  Members  of  former  Constitutional  Conventions. 

4.  The  members  of  the  Senate  and  Assembly  and  ex-Speakers. 

5.  The  State  officers,  deputies  and  commissioners. 

6.  The  Regents  of  the  University. 

7.  United  States  Senators  and  Congressmen. 

8.  The  Capitol  Commissioners. 

9.  Persons  in  the  exercise  of  an  official  duty  directly  connected 
with  the  business  of  the  Convention. 

10.  The  reporters  for  the  press,  as  provided  by  subdivision  7 
of  rule  2. 

No  other  person  shall  be  admitted  to  the  floor  during  the  session, 
except  upon  the  permission  of  the  President  or  by  vote  of  the  Con- 
vention ;  and  persons  so  admitted  shall  be  allowed  to  occupy  places 
only  in  the  seats  in  the  rear  of  the  Assembly  Chamber.  All  per- 
mits granted  by  the  President  may  be  revoked  by  him  at  pleasure, 


15  Doc.  Xo.   10 

or  upon  the  order  of  the  Convention.  Xo  person  shall  be  entitled 
to  the  privileges  of  the  floor  of  the  Convention  as  a  legislative  re- 
porter of  a  newspaper  who  is  interested  in  pending  or  contemplated 
constitutional  revision,  or  who  is  employed  by,  or  receives  com- 
pensation from,  any  corporation,  except  a  newspaper,  news  or  press 
association.  The  doors  of  the  Convention  shall  be  kept  open  to 
the  public  during  all  its  sessions. 

CHAPTER  XIV 
General  Rules 

Rule  55.  Equivalent  motions,  resolutions  or  amendments 
thereto,  shall  not  be  entertained.  If  any  question  contains  several 
distinct  propositions,  it  shall  be  divided  by  the  Chair  at  the  request 
of  any  member,  but  a  motion  to  "  strike  out  and  insert  "  shall  be 
indivisible. 

Rule  50.  All  proposed  action  touching  the  rules  and  orders  of 
business  shall  be  referred,  as  of  course,  to  the  Committee  on 
Rules ;  such  committee  may  sit  during  the  session  of  the  Conven- 
tion without  special  leave,  and  report  at  any  time  on  rules  or  order 
of  business  so  referred  to  them.  It  will  be  in  order  to  call  up 
for  consideration  at  any  time  a  report  from  the  Committee  on 
Rules.  Any  member  may  object  to  its  consideration  until  the  next 
legislative  day,  and,  if  sustained  by  twenty-four  other  members, 
the  consideration  shall  be  so  postponed,  but  only  once.  Pending  the 
final  consideration  thereof,  but  one  motion,  except  by  unanimous 
consent,  that  the  Convention  adjourn,  may  be  entertained,  and 
no  other  dilatory  motion  shall  be  entertained  until  such  report  is 
fully  disposed  of.  A  motion  to  suspend  the  rules  shall  in  all  cases 
state  specifically  the  object  of  the  suspension,  and  every  case  of 
suspension  of  a  rule  under  such  notice  and  motion  shall  be  held  to 
apply  only  to  the  object  specified  therein.  Provided  that  when 
ordered  so  to  do  by  the  Convention  a  standing  committee  shall 
make  a  report  on  a  Constitutional  amendment  or  other  subject,  the 
Committee  on  Rules  shall  report  a  rule  limiting  the  time  for  de- 
bate ;  and  upon  such  report  no  member  shall  speak  more  than 
once,  nor  more  than  five  minutes.  Such  report  shall  stand  as 
the  time  limited  for  debate  on  the  subject-matter  referred  to  in 
such  rule,  and  the  previous  question  or  other  motion  to  close  debate 
shall  not  be  in  order  until  the  expiration  of  the  time  so  allotted, 


Doc.  No.  10  16 

or  the  debate  has  been  closed;  the  time  thus  allotted  for  debate 
shall  be  equally  divided  between  those  in  favor  and  those  opposed 
to  the  subject-matter  under  consideration.  All  questions  or  mo- 
tions authorized  by  this  rule  shall  be  decided  at  once  without  delay 
or  debate,  except  as  herein  expressly  allowed. 

Rule  57.  The  yeas  and  nays  may  be  taken  on  any  question 
whenever  so  required  by  any  fifteen  members  (unless  a  division  by 
yeas  and  nays  be  already  pending),  and  when  so  taken  shall  be 
entered  on  the  Journal. 

Rule  58.  When  the  Convention  shall  be  equally  divided  on  any 
question,  including  the  President's  vote,  the  question  shall  be 
deemed  to  be  lost. 

Rule  59.  In  considering  the  report  of  the  Committee  on  Re- 
vision and  Engrossment,  each  article  shall  be  open  to  amendment 
germane  to  such  changes  as  may  have  been  reported  by  the  com- 
mittee, without  previous  notice,  but  no  one  shall  speak  more  than 
five  minutes,  or  more  than  once,  on  any  proposition  to  amend. 

Rule  60.  When  a  blank  is  to  be  filled  and  different  sums  or 
times  shall  be  proposed,  the  question  shall  be  first  taken  on  the 
highest  sum  and  the  longest  time. 

Rule  61.  A  majority  of  the  Convention  shall  constitute  a 
quorum.  In  all  cases  of  the  absence  of  members  during  its  sessions 
the  members  present  shall  take  such  measures  as  they  shall  deem 
necessary  to  secure  the  presence  of  absentees,  and  may  inflict  such 
censure  or  pecuniary  penalty  as  they  may  deem  just  on  those  who, 
on  being  called  on  for  that  purpose,  shall  not  render  sufficient 
excuse  for  their  absence.  No  constitutional  amendment  shall  be 
adopted  unless  by  the  assent  of  a  majority  of  all  the  members 
elected  to  the  Convention. 

Rule  62.  For  the  purpose  of  securing  the  attendance  oi'  mem- 
bers, a  call  of  the  Convention  may  be  made,  but  such  call  shall  nol 
be  in  order  after  the  main  question  has  been  ordered,  nor  after 
the  voting  on  any  question  has  commenced,  nor  after  the  third 
reading  of  an  amendment  has  been  completed. 

Rule  63.  When  less  than  a  quorum  vote  on  any  subject  under 
consideration  by  the  Convention,  it  shall  bo  in  order,  on  motion, 
to  close  the  bar  of  the  Convention,  whereupon  the  roll  of  members 
shall  be  called  by  the  Secretary,  and  if  it  is  ascertained  thai  a 
quorum  is  present,  either  by  answering  to  their  names  or  by  their 


17  Doc.  No.   10 

presence  in  the  Convention,  the  yeas  and  nays  shall  again  be 
ordered  by  the  President,  and  if  any  member  present  refuses  to 
vote,  such  refusal  shall  be  deemed  a  contempt,  and  any  member  or 
members  so  offending  shall  be  cited  before  the  Committee  on  Privi- 
leges and  Elections,  which,  after  inquiry,  shall  report  to  the  Con- 
vention for  such  action  as  the  facts  shall  seem  to  warrant,  and, 
unless  purged,  the  Convention  may  order  the  Sergeant-at-Arms  to 
remove  said  member  or  members  without  the  bar  of  the  Conven- 
tion, and  all  privileges  of  membership  shall  be  refused  the  person 
or  persons  so  offending  until  the  contempt  be  duly  purged. 

Rule  64.  Whenever  any  person  shall  be  brought  before  the  bar 
of  the  Convention  for  adjudged  breach  of  its  privileges,  no  debate 
shall  be  in  order,  but  the  President  shall  proceed  to  execute  the 
judgment  of  the  Convention  without  delay  or  debate. 

Rule  05.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Secretary  to  keep  the 
Journal  of  each  day's  proceedings,  which  shall  be  printed  and  laid 
on  the  table  of  members  on  the  morning  after  its  approval.  In 
addition  to  his  other  duties,  he  shall  prepare  and  supervise  the 
printing  of  the  calendars  of  the  orders  of  the  day  and  cause  them 
to  be  placed  on  the  files  before  the  beginning  of  each  day's  session. 
All  appointments  of  officers  and  employees  shall  be  entered  on  the 
Journal  of  the  Convention,  with  the  date  of  appointment. 

Rule  06.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  stenographer  of  the  Con- 
vention to  be  present  at  every  session  of  the  Convention.  He  shall 
take  stenographic  notes  of  the  debates  in  the  Convention  and  in 
Committee  of  the  Whole  and  shall,  at  each  day's  session  of  the 
Convention,  furnish  a  copy  of  the  debates  of  the  day  before,  writ- 
ten out  in  long-hand,  and  file  the  same  with  the  Secretary,  who 
shall  keep  the  same  in  his  office,  and  the  same  shall  at  all  times  be 
open  to  the  inspection  of  delegates. 

Rule  67.  At  a  reasonable  time,  to  be  determined  by  the  Con- 
vention, and  at  least  five  days  before  final  adjournment,  the  Com- 
mittee on  Revision  and  Engrossment,  shall  be  instructed  to  accu- 
rately enroll  and  engross  the  present  State  Constitution,  with  all 
amendments  thereto  properly  inserted,  or  the  proposed  new  Con- 
stitution ;  and  the  same  shall  be  reported  by  said  committee  to  the 
Convention,  read  through  therein,  and  submitted  to  a  final  vote 
prior  to  its  final  adjournment.  When  an  article  of  the  Constitu- 
tion  is  amended,   or  a   new   article   substituted   or  added,   such 


Doc.  No.   10  18 

amended  article,  or  new  article,  shall  be  enrolled  and  engrossed 
entire  in  its  proper  place  in  the  Constitution. 

CHAPTER  XV 
Miscellaneous  Provisions 
Rule  68.  The  Sergeant-at-Arms  shall,  under  the  direction  of 
the  Committee  on  Printing,  receive  from  the  printer  all  matter 
printed  for  the  use  of  the  Convention,  and  keep  a  record  of  the 
time  of  the  reception  of  each  document,  and  the  number  of  copies 
received,  and  cause  a  copy  of  each  to  be  placed  on  the  desk  of  each 
member  immediately  after  their  reception  by  him.  Subject  to 
the  direction  of  the  President,  he  shall  enforce  the  rules  of  the 
Convention. 

Rule  69.  Separate  files  of  the  daily  Journal,  reports  of  the  com- 
mittees and  of  all  documents  ordered  to  be  printed  shall  be  pre- 
pared and  kept  by  the  Sergeant-at-Arms,  and  one  copy  shall  be 
placed  upon  the  desk  of  each  member  of  the  Convention  and  of  the 
Secretary. 

Rule  70.  There  shall  be  printed  as  of  course  and  without  any 
special  order  1,500  copies  of  the  journal,  500  copies  of  the 
calendar,  2,500  copies  of  each  proposed  constitutional  amendment, 
and  .3,500  copies  of  each  report  and  minority  report  of  a  com- 
mittee on  the  subject  of  constitutional  revision  or  amendment  in 
which  are  set  forth  the  reasons  for  their  recommendation,  to  be 
printed  as  documents;  500  copies  of  each  other  document;  and 
3,500  copies  of  the  record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  convention. 

Rule  71.  The  printed  copies  provided  tor  in  Rule  70  shall  be 
disposed  of  as  follows; 

There  shall  be  reserved  for  binding  1.200  copies  of  the  journal, 
1,200  copies  of  the  reports,  1,200  copies  of  the  record  of  the 
proceedings. 

The  copies  so  reserved  for  binding  shall  be  folded,  collated  and 
held  bv  the  printer  until  the  close  of  the  Convention,  when  they 
shall  be  bound  as  directed  by  the  President  or  the  Convention, 
and  distributed  as  follows; 

To  each  member  of  the  Convention,  two  copies. 

To  the  State  Library,  five  copies. 

To  the  Legislative  Library,  five  copies. 

To  the  office  of  each  county  clerk,  one  copy. 


19  Doc.  No.  10 

To  each  public  library  of  the  State,  one  copy. 

To  each  bar  association  of  the  State,  one  copy. 

To  each  college  and  university  of  the  State,  one  copy,  and  the 
remaining  copies  shall  be  distributed  as  designated  by  the  Presi- 
dent or  the  Convention. 

The  printed  copies  provided  for  in  Rule  70  and  not  reserved 
for  binding  shall  be  disposed  of  as  follows: 

One  copy  of  each  shall  be  placed  upon  the  file  of  each  member 
of  the  Convention,  and  one  additional  copy  shall  be  delivered  or 
mailed  to  each  member  as  he  shall  direct. 

Two  copies  of  each  shall  be  placed  in  the  Legislative  Library 
for  use  of  members  of  the  Convention. 

One  hundred  copies  shall  be  reserved  for  the  use  of  the  officers 
of  the  Convention,  the  State  Library,  the  Department  of  Educa- 
tion, the  Legislative  Index  Publishing  Company,  and  the  docu- 
ment room  reserve. 

Copies  of  the  proposed  constitutional  amendment,  of  the  reports 
and  of  the  record  shall  be  mailed  daily  to  daily  newspapers  and 
weekly  to  all  other  newspapers  and  to  each  public  library  of  the 
State,  each  bar  association  of  the  State,  each  law  school  of  the 
State,  each  college  and  university  of  the  state,  and  to  such  other 
institutions,  newspapers  and  individuals  as  shall  apply  therefor 
and  can  be  supplied  from  the  number  printed  not  necessary  for  the 
current  work  of  the  Convention. 

Two  copies  of  proposed  constitutional  amendments  and  two 
copies  of  reports  for  each  member  of  the  committees  having  duty 
in  relation  thereto  shall  be  delivered  to  the  clerk  of  such  com- 
mittees. 

The  balance  of  printed  copies  provided  for  and  not  reserved  for 
binding  shall  be  distributed  in  the  order  of  application  therefor 
by  the  members  of  the  Convention. 

Rule  72.  The  officers  of  the  Convention  appointed  by  the  Presi- 
dent shall  perform  such  duties  as  he  may  prescribe,  and  for  any 
breach  of  duty  any  such  officer  may  be  removed  and  his  successor 
appointed  by  the  President.  The  officers  of  the  Convention  ap- 
pointed by  the  Secretary  shall  perform  such  duties  as  he  may 
prescribe,  and  for  any  breach  of  duty  any  such  officers  may  be 
removed  and  his  successor  be  appointed  by  the  Secretary. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.   11 


JOINT  MEETING  OF  THE  COMMITTEES  ON  GOVERNOR 
AND  OTHER  STATE  OFFICERS  AND  STATE 
FINANCES  WITH  HON.  WILLIAM  HOWARD  TAFT, 
EX-PRESIDENT  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 


The  Senate  Chamber,  The  Capitol 
Albany,  K  Y.,  June  10,  1915,  8:10  o'clock  p.  m. 
Mr.  Tanner. —  Gentlemen,  the  meeting  will  be  in  order. 

I  think  I  shall  ask  Mr.  Stimson,  Mr.  Taft's  former  Secretary 
of  War,  to  introduce  him,  as  far  as  an  introduction  is  necessary 
for  Mr.  Taft.     (Applause.) 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Gentlemen  of  the  two  committees  and  other 
delegates :  I  don't  think  that  Mr.  Taft  needs  any  introduction 
to  this  assembly.  He  has  been  invited  and  has  very  kindly  come 
to  speak  of  his  experiences  in  regard  to  the  Federal  budget.  I 
think  I  am  not  mistaken  in  saying  that  he  is  the  only  American 
President  who  ever  attempted  to  create  a  really  scientific  budget 
of  the  Federal  expenditures.  That  is  the  part  of  what  he  has 
to  say  that  has  connection  with  the  Committee  on  State  Finances. 
He  also  as  an  executive  has  had  experience  surpassing  that  of 


Doc.  No.  11  2 

almost  any  other  executive,  considering  his  experience  in  the 
creation  of  the  new  government  in  the  Philippines,  his  experience 
afterward  in  the  Cabinet  of  President  Roosevelt,  and  afterward 
as  the  Chief  Executive  of  this  nation,  and  I  understand  that  on 
that  part  he  has  been  asked  to  speak  before  the  Committee  on  the 
Governor  and  the  State  Officers,  which  has  charge  of  the  reorgan- 
ization of  the  executive  offices  of  this  State. 

Mr.  President,  I  am  sure  that  we  feel  greatly  honored  at  your 
coming  and  at  your  being  willing  to  talk  to  us  about  those  two 
subjects. 

Mr.  Tanner. — Mr.  President,  we  have  a  joint  committee  meet- 
ing to  consider  the  subjects  pending  before  the  Committee  on 
Governor  and  Other  State  Officers  and  the  Committee  on  State 
Finances.  If  it  is  agreeable  to  you,  we  would  like  to  have  you 
speak  in  the  order  named. 

The  Committee  on  Governor  and  Other  State  Officers  has  made 
a  study  of  the  departments,  commissions  and  boards  in  the  ex- 
ecutive branch  of  the  government  in.  New  York  State  to-day 
We  have  found  that  there  are  152  of  those  divisions,  commissions 
and  boards,  in  most  cases  totally  uncorrelated,  and  it  seems  at 
least  to  the  majority  of  the  Committee  unscientific  in  ar- 
rangement. 

The  Committee  for  which  I  speak  desires  to  get  as  much  light 
as  possible  from  the  Federal  system,  and  after  that  I  assume  that 
Mr.  Stimson  will  ask  you  to  speak  on  the  State  budget  '  following 
the  lines  of  the  Federal  budget. 

The  meetings  heretofore  have  been  informal  in  raaracter  and 
free  in  questioning,  and  if  agreeable  to  you,  we  ould  like  to 
pursue  that  method  to-night.  First,  if  you  w  outline  the 
Federal  departments  and  submit  yourself  to  sn  iterrogation 

as  the  Committee  desires  to  make. 

Mr.  Taft. —  Well,  gentlemen  of  the  Conim'  jion't  know- 
that  I  am  competent  to  aid  you  in  detenu  in  hat  the  State 
of  New  York  ought  to  have  by  reason  of  mn  perience  I  have 
had  in  the  State  government. 

When   1  have1  been  the  executive,  the  vy<  e  had  control  of 

the   executive   and   was   responsible1    for    i         :  ecutive.      In  the 

Philippines,   the  now  Governor-Genera]  member   of   the 


3  Doc.  No.  11 

legislative  body,  and  the  members  of  the  legislative  body  were  his 
subordinates  in  the  various  departments,  and  then  there  were 
three  members  of  the  legislative  body  that  were  not  executive. 
They  were  three  Philippinos;  and  that  made  a  very  comfortable 
government,  so  far  as  having  the  policy  which  was  pursued  the 
one  that  the  executive  and  the  men  who  were  responsible  wished 
to  have  it.  Of  course  in  the  Federal  system  at  Washington,  the 
President  appoints  the  cabinet  officers  and  appoints  all  executive 
officers  —  the  heads  of  executive  bureaus  and  independent  officers. 
Congress  has  conferred  some  independent  powers  on  some  of  the 
cabinet  officers.  The  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  exercises  some 
of  those,  and  the  Attorney-General.  I  believe  the  Attorney- 
General  and  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  send  reports  directly 
to  Congress  and  not  through  the  President,  but  what  is  done  is 
the  President's  word.  If  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  did  not 
do  what  the  President  wished  hiin  to  do,  of  course  he  would  get 
rid  of  that  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  and  the  same  thing  is  true 
of  all  the  officers,  even  with  respect  to  functions  in  which  they 
exercise  an  independent  discretion  under  the  law.  There  is  only 
one  officer  who  is  free  from  the  Presidential  control,  and  that 
is  the  Comptroller  of  the  Treasury.  He  acts  in  a  quasi-judicial 
capacity,  and  f  the  President  did  not  like  his  decisions  I  suppose 
he  could  remove  him,  but  the  custom  has  grown  up  to  treat  him 
as  a  quasi-judicial  tribunal  and  to  respect  his  judgments,  and  it 
is  not  i'louiMt  that  the  President  ought  to  intervene. 

Mr.  T  i.is  xek. —  His  powers  are  purely  that  of  an  auditor,  are 
they  not  ? 

Mr.  T  {\ —  Well,  yes ;  he  is  the  real  auditor.  He  passes  on 
claims  aj  ...cides  questions  of  law  with  respect  to  those  claims, 
and  ther  rs  them  to  the  Court  of  Claims  if  it  is  necessary. 

The  i  the  State  government,  like  this  of  New   York, 

with  15b  (  nt  commissions  spread  all  over  the  State,  only 

arouses  in  n  ':e  same  feeling  that  I  have  with  respect  to  our 
methods  of  c(     'acting  our  courts:  profound  admiration  for  the 


political  adapti  ility  of  the  people  to  make  a  machine  work  that 
nobody  who  had  &"'  real  business  sense  would  think  would  work 
under  any  other  cl  <%,  v«.  (Applause.)  They  get  along  some 
how.     It  costs  them  .  t  it  might..     But  so  it  is. 


Doc.  No.  11  4 

Mr.  Tanner. —  Well,  your  idea,  President  Taft,  is  that  if  a 
scientific  scheme  of  government,  so  far  as  the  executive  branch 
was  concerned,  was  framed,  you  could  practically  reduce  the  cost 
by  one-half  ? 

Mr.  Taft. —  Well,  if  you  have  150  bureaus  or  commissions 
like  that,  independent  of  the  governor,  I  should  think  you  might. 
Of  course  that  is  only  a  very  general  remark.  It  is  an  unsafe 
remark  to  make.  But  I  mean  that  that  kind  of  independence 
of  the  executive,  with  a  division  into  a  hydra-headed  beast  for  the 
consumption  of  the  money  of  the  people  is  sure  to  increase  the 
expense. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  Is  that  on  the  theory  that  each  of  these  de- 
partments has  its  own  overhead  expense? 

Mr.  Taft. —  Yes ;  not  only  that,  but  that  each  of  the  depart- 
ments is  independent  in  its  action  and  not  responsible  to  the 
Governor  or  anybody  else  for  efficiency  and  economy  in  its  con- 
duct ;  and  each  bureau,  under  those  conditions  ■ —  it  is  bad  enough 
when  they  are  responsible  to  the  President  —  but  each  bureau, 
under  those  conditions,  is  bound  to  think  that  its  function  is  the 
most  important  in  the  State,  and,  therefore,  to  enlarge  its  expense 
in  every  way  in  order  that  it  may  be  useful  and  contribute  to 
that  uplift  that  it  was  created  to  effect.  It  works  inevitably  that 
way.  It  is  so  in  every  bureau  in  Washington,  that  each  bureau 
chief  thinks  that  that  function  he  performs  is  the  most  important 
one,  and  that  while  economy  ought  to  be  in  another  bureau, 
not  in  that. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  Well,  what  is  the  remedy  you  suggest,  making 
fewer  departments  under  which  these  bureaus  can  be  grouped  ? 

Mr.  Taft. — Oh,  of  course.  I  would  reduce  them  and  then 
I  would  put  them  all  under  the  Governor,  or  under  somebody  that 
should  have  the  power.  The  only  way  you  can  run  a  govern- 
ment efficiently  and  economically  is  to  have  the  responsibility  on 
some  one  as  to  the  total  expenditure. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  Mr.  President,  will  you  describe  the  system 
that  is  followed  in  the  Federal  government  which  at  least  com- 
paratively brings  about  the  state  of  facts  that  you  desire? 


5  Doc.  ^o.  11 

Mr.  Taft. —  Well,  the  Federal  government  is  not  a  model  in 
that  regard,  but,  under  the  present  system,  every  department  head 
and  every  independent  office  prepares  an  estimate  of  the  expenses 
of  his  department  for  the  next  ensuing  fiscal  year,  and  by  law 
it  is  sent  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury.  He  makes  a  com- 
parative statement  showing  the  expenses  that  are  estimated  for 
the  next  year,  and  the  expenses  that  are  incurred  in  the  previous 
year,  the  appropriations  —  that  is,  the  estimates  made  in  the  pre- 
vious year  and  the  appropriations  made  on  those  estimates  — 
so  that  a  comparison  can  at  once  be  instituted  by  the  committees 
of  Congress  as  to  whether  an  increase  is  asked,  or  a  decrease, 
and  in  what  item.  Those  estimates  are  required  to  be  in  in  the 
summer  time,  and  the  Secretary  receives  them  and  collates  them 
by  October,  and  they  are  sent  to  the  committee  before  Congress 
meets.  Then,  under  the  law,  he  makes  an  estimate  also  of  the 
revenues  for  the  next  year,  and  if  there  is  a  deficit  he  is  required 
to  suggest  what  steps  should  be  taken  to  meet  the  deficit. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  It  would  clarify  the  minds  of  the  committee 
somewhat  who  have  not  studied  into  the  Federal  system  as  much 
as  the  State  system,  if  they  knew  not  so  much  how  the  budget 
is  made  up  by  the  departments  as  how  the  departments  them- 
selves are  made  up.  There  are  nine  of  those  departments,  that 
is,  under  cabinet  heads,  are  there  not  ? 

Mr.  Taft. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  Will  you  be  good  enough  to  describe  to  the 
Committee  what  the  functions  approximately  of  these  various  de- 
partments are? 

Mr.  Taft. —  Well,  there  is  the  Secretary  of  State,  who  attends 
to  the  diplomatic  relations  of  the  government.  He  is  the  Presi- 
dent in  our  diplomatic  relations.  He  does  not  make  a  report  to 
Congress.  He  recommends  to  the  President  the  appointment  of 
the  ambassadors  and  the  consular  officers,  the  ministers.  He 
carries  ou  the  diplomatic  correspondence  of  the  government. 
Then  comes  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  who  conducts  the 
financial  operations  of  the  government,  and  then  has  under  his 
control  a  lot  of  bureaus  that  have  no  more  to  do  with  financing 
than  they  have  to  do  with  any  other  department  of  the  govern- 


Doc.  No.  11  6 

ment;  but  the  Treasury  Department  was  made  for  the  time 
being  a  kt  catch-all  "  of  a  great  many  different  bureaus  to  per- 
form different  functions,  and  they  are  not  all  of  them  related  to 
the  financial  functions  of  the  government.  He  attends  to  the 
collection  of  all  taxes.  He  has  under  him  the  Comptroller  of 
the  Treasury,  the  auditors  who  audit  for  the  different  depart- 
ments; they  are  his  subordinates.  He  is  the  Treasurer  of  the 
United  States,  who  holds  the  money,  and  he  has  three  assistant 
secretaries,  one  of  whom  attends  to  the  financial  part,  one  of 
whom  attends  to  the  building  of  public  buildings  and  superin- 
tends the  supervising  architect,  and  the  other  attends  to  the 
revenue  service;  and  under  him  is  the  Commissioner  of  Internal 
Revenue  and  the  Collector  of  Customs.  One  of  those  assistant 
secretaries  rules  on  the  questions  of  customs. 

Then  there  is  the  Secretary  of  War,  who  has  the  army  under 
him  and  who  has  also  our  dependencies,  the  Philippines,  Porto 
Rico,  and,  when  we  have  Cuba,  Cuba  (laughter),  and  then  he 
has  the  Panama  Canal. 

Then  comes  the  Attorney-General  who  conducts  the  Depart- 
ment of  Justice  and  has  the  prisons  and  the  reformatories  under 
him,  and  all  the  executive  officers  of  the  courts,  as  well  as  the 
district  attorneys.  Then,  coming  after  him,  is  the  Postmaster- 
General,  who  attends  to  the  post-office  department.  Following 
him  is  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy,  who  runs  the  Navy  Department ; 
and  then  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  that,  too,  was  a  "  catch- 
all "  department,  into  which  everything  was  put  at  first.  The 
district  attorneys  and  the  marshals  were  under  him  for  a  time 
before  they  established  the  Department  of  Justice.  Now  he  has 
the  Land  Office  and  the  Patent  Office,  the  Pension  Bureau,  the 
Reclamation  of  Public  Lands,  and  some  other  functions ;  but  I 
think  I  have  mentioned  the  more  important  —  he  has  —  well,  he 
has  the  continental  territories,  he  has  Alaska  under  him,  and  he 
has  the  Indian  Department  under  him. 

Then  the  Secretary  of  Agriculture:  The  name  indicates  what 
his  functions  are.  And  the  Secretary  of  Commerce  and  Labor, 
as  it  was  in  my  time,  he  had  commercial  agents  under  him.  He 
had  —  let  me  see — did  ho  have  the  coast  survey?  I  think  he 
die].  Those  new  departments  it  is  a  little  difficult  to  remember, 
because  they  are  divided  up  between  the  Labor  and  the  Com- 


7  Doc.  No.  11 

merce,  in  making  up  the  nine  departments,  the  Bureau  of  Mines, 
and  in  the  Agricultural  Department  they  had  the  Bureau  of 
Forestry,  while  they  had  the  Bureau  of  Lands  in  the  Interior  De- 
partment, and  in  the  Bureau  of  Labor,  1  think  now  the  Immigra- 
tion Department  has  been  transferred  to  that  from  the  Depart- 
ment of  Commerce  and  Labor.  That  makes  up  the  nine  depart- 
ments. 

Then  there  are  some  independent  offices;  the  Civil  Service 
Bureau  is  one;  the  Commissioners  of  the  District  of  Columbia 
another;  the  Smithsonian  Institute  another;  there  are  not  many, 
but  there  are  some  independent  bureaus  that  report  directly  to 
the  President,  but  there  are  very  few. 

Now,  the  heads  of  departments  are  the  President's  fingers. 
They  have  been  so  described,  and  they  are  immediately  under 
him.  They  do  —  of  course,  he  grants  —  if  he  is  a  wise  Presi- 
dent, he  grants  to  them  very  great  discretion  in  what  they  do, 
and  he  relies  on  their  advice,  but  they  consult  him  about  every 
matter  of  policy,  and  they  also  consult  him  about  matters  of  econ- 
omy, so  that  he  has  the  government  in  his  hands,  and  as  he  is 
responsible  for  the  government  he  ought  to  have  it,  and  it  greatly 
adds  to  the  efficiency  of  the  Federal  government.  It  is  one  of  the 
reasons  why  the  Federal  government  is  so  strong  in  its  execution 
of  law  as  compared  with  the  inefficiency  of  state  governments. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  Regarding  the  Attorney-General,  President 
Taft,  the  question  has  sometimes  been  raised  whether  or  not  the 
fact  that  he  was  an  appointive  officer  would  rob  him  of  his  inde- 
pendence in  his  functions,  so  far  as  they  are  advisory  or  quasi- 
judicial. 

Mr.  Taft. —  What  judicial  functions  has  he? 

Mr.  Tanner. —  I  mean  before  —  for  instance,  starting  prose- 
cutions.    I  don't  mean  judicial  strictly  speaking. 

Mr.  Taft. —  I  don't  think  so. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  Has  it  been  your  experience  that  his  being  an 
appointive  officer  has  made  him  less  independent  than  if  he  were 
an  elective? 

Mr.  Taft. —  Oh,  I  have  no  doubt  it  has. 


Doc.  No.  11  8 

Mr.  Tanner. —  To  what  extent. 

Mr.  Taft. —  Independent,  if  you  want  independence  of  that 
sort ;  but  that  is  the  kind  of  independence  you  don't  want  —  at 
least,  I  don't  want  it.  It  is  part  of  the  executive.  It  is  a  prose- 
cution it  is  carrying  on.  The  government  is  enforcing  the  law. 
Why  shouldn't  it  be  under  the  man  who  is  at  the  head  and  re- 
sponsible for  its  enforcement?  If  you  want  a  judge,  why  make 
a  judge;  but  if  you  want  a  man  who  is  to  do  things  and  enforce 
the  law,  when  the  man  at  the  head  is  charged  with  the  faithful 
execution  of  the  law,  or  with  taking  care  that  the  laws  are  faith- 
fully executed,  why  shouldn't  the  man  who  conducts  the  prosecu- 
tion and  represents  the  state  from  the  executive  standpoint,  be  re- 
sponsible to  the  man  at  the  head  of  the  state  ? 

Mr.  Stimson. —  I  think  the  question  generally  asked,  Mr. 
President,  is  not  in  respect  to  his  prosecuting  functions,  but  in 
respect  to  his  functions  as  an  advisor  of  the  different  departments 
of  the  State.  It  is  argued  that  an  elective  Attorney-General  is  a 
more  accurate  and  independent  adviser  of  the  different  officers  of 
the  State  whom  it  is  his  business  under  the  law  to  advise. 

Mr.  Taft. —  Well,  if  you  are  going  to  have  a  lot  of  independ- 
ent officers,  who  are  running  their  own  boats,  paddling  their  own 
canoes,  without  respect  to  the  head  of  the  State,  then,  of  course, 
you  want  a  judicial  officer  to  decide  between  them.  But  if  you 
are  running  a  government  on  the  basis  of  the  head  man  being 
responsible  for  what  is  done,  and  for  the  work  being  done  in  the 
most  effective  way,  then  what  you  want  is  a  counsel.  When  you 
consult  a  lawyer,  you  don't  consult  a  judge.  You  consult  a  man 
who  is  with  you,  seeking  to  help  you  in  carrying  out  the  lawful 
purposes  that  you  have.  Therefore  he  ought  to  be  your  ap- 
pointee. You  select  him.  If  you  go  to  a  counsellor  to  help  you 
in  matters  of  law.  Now  the  chief  executive  is  given  an  Attorney- 
General  to  advise  and  represent  hini  in  all  legal  matters.  I  don't 
see  why  he  shouldn't  bo  appointed.  It  would  be  most  awkward 
if  he  was  not,  in  Washington,  T  can  tell  you  that.     (Laughter.) 

Mr.  Tanner. —  President  Taft,  I  don't  know  whether  this  is 
a  fair  question  or  not,  for  it  relates  to  the  State  government :  This 


9  Doc.  No.  11 

morning  in  the  Convention  there  was  introduced  an  amendment 
which,  among  other  things,  provided  that  the  Governor  should 
have  power  to  modify  or  veto  the  rules,  regulations,  orders  or  de- 
cisions of  all  boards  and  commissions  in  the  executive  branch  of 
the  government,  I  assume  that  does  not  refer  to  the  Public  Serv- 
ice Commissions  or  quasi-judicial  bodies.  To  what  extent  does 
the  President  either  have  or  exercise  that  power  over  the  rules  or 
decisions  of  the  commissions  or  executive  departments  where  he 
makes  the  appointment  ? 

Mr.  Taft. —  Well,  take  the  regulations  of  the  Internal  Rev- 
enue Department.  The  President  never  sees  them.  They  are 
made  up  by  the  Commissioner  of  Internal  Revenue,  and  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury  approves  them.  The  regulations  with 
respect  to  the  Civil  Service  Bureau  cannot  have  any  effect  until 
the  President  approves;  but  that  is  because  they  are  an  inde- 
pendent bureau.  In  other  words,  the  heads  of  departments  are 
generally  called  upon  to  approve  all  the  regulations,  but  those 
regulations  are  all  under  the  control  of  the  President,  and  if  his 
attention  is  called  to  some  regulation  that  ought  not  to  be  there, 
and  he  concludes  it  ought  not  to  be  there,  he  asks  the  head  of  the 
department  to  modify  it.  It  is  not  a  question  of  what  he  actually 
does,  but  what  he  may  do  when  the  issue  arises.  And  except  with 
respect  to  the  Comptroller  of  the  Treasury,  to  which  I  referred,  his 
will  prevails.  Of  course  when  you  come  to  the  Interstate  Commerce 
Commission,  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission,  in  my  judg- 
ment, is  not  an  executive  tribunal.  Of  course  it  makes  the  constitu- 
tional lawyer  that  regards  the  rule  that  you  cannot  have  delegated 
legislative  power,  it  gives  him  goose  flesh  to  have  it  called  what  it 
really  is,  namely,  it  is  the  delegation  of  power  by  Congress  to  the 
Interstate  Commerce  Commission  to  do  that  which  Congress  is  not 
so  constituted  that  it  may  do,  because  it  cannot  sit  all  the  time  and 
cannot  pass  on  a  million  rates.  But  that  is  what  the  Interstate 
Commerce  Commission  does  under  the  rules  laid  down.  That  is 
not  an  executive  commission  and  it  is  not  under  the  control  of  the 
President,  because  it  is  exercising  legislative  power. 

Mr.  Taxxee. —  Gentlemen,  are  there  any  other  questions  by 
the  Committee  on  Governor  and  Other  State  Officers  ? 


Doc.  No.  11  10 

Mr.  Khees. —  Might  I  ask  one  question '(  What  auditing  func- 
tion is  there  in  the  United  States  government  which  has  any  inde- 
pendence of  the  executive  ? 

Mr.  Taft. —  Practically  none.  The  Comptroller  of  the  Treas- 
ury is  at  the  head  of  the  auditors.  There  are  appeals  from  the 
six  auditors  of  the  treasury  to  the  Comptroller  of  the  Treasury, 
who  puts  the  final  audit,  and  there  is  practically  nothing  inde- 
pendent of  the  executive. 

Mr.  Ehees. —  Is  the  Comptroller  of  the  Treasury  charged  with 
the  duty  of  certifying  all  payments  from  the  treasury  ? 

Mr.  Taft. —  He  is  charged  with  the  duty  of  countersigning 
every  warrant,  and  nothing  is  taken  out  of  the  —  no  warrant  is 
honored  by  the  Treasurer  except  on  his  certificate. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  But  by  custom,  Mr.  President,  he  is  treated  as 
a  very  independent  officer  ? 

Mr.  Taft. —  Oh,  yes.  Congress  has  made  him,  as  I  say,  a 
quasi-judicial  tribunal  with  respect  to  claims  and  with  respect 
to  compliance  with  law,  but  he  is  appointed  by  the  President 
and  may  be  removed  by  the  President. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  But,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  that  lias  never  hap- 
pended  within  the  memory  of  any  of  us  ? 

Mr.  Taft. —  Oh,  no ;  I  don't  remember  — 

Mr.  Stimson. —  And  he  often  makes  very  embarrassing  deci- 
sions when  he  stops  the  various  cabinet  officers  from  spending 
money  ?     Spending  what  they  would  like  to  spend  ? 

Mr.  Taft. —  Yes,  he  does. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  I  saw  the  other  day  ho  just  stopped  a  very 
important  expenditure  of  money  in  the  War  Department  on  these 
manoeuvre  camps.  Nobody  thinks  of  removing  him  because  he 
does  that? 

Mr.  Taft. —  No.  As  a  general  rule,  the  Comptroller  of  the 
Treasury  is  regarded  as  quite  an  independent  officer,  and  fre- 
quently executive  policy  is  determined  by  sending  over  to  the 


11  Doc.  No.  11 

Comptroller  to  learn  whether  such  an  expenditure  would  be 
lawful  or  not,  and  when  he  approves  —  Congress  has  clothed  him 
with  such  powers  that  when  he  approves  —  the  executive  feels 
safe  about  it.  He  sometimes  comes  into  conflict  with  the  opinion 
of  the  Attorney-General;  and  he  does  not  yield  to  the  Attorney- 
General,  and  is  not  obliged  to. 

Mr.  Rhees. —  Is  the  Comptroller  of  the  Treasury  —  does  he 
change  ordinarily  with  the  change  of  administration  \ 

Mr.  Taft. —  Yes ;  ordinarily  he  does.  He  did  not  change  in 
my  day;  but,  then,  very  few  did.     (Laughter.) 

Mr.  Low. —  Mr.  President,  is  the  Comptroller  of  the  Treasury 
a  different  officer  from  the  Comptroller  of  the  Currency  ? 

Mr.  Taft. —  Yes;  the  Comptroller  of  the  Currency  is  at  the 
head  of  the  Banking  Department;  also  in  the  treasury,  however, 
and  part  of  the  fiscal  machinery. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  Mr.  President,  you  have  described  the  effect 
that  this  concentrated  machinery  has  on  the  efficiency  of  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  United  States  as  compared  with  the  efficiency  of 
the  State  government.  Have  you  any  observation  to  make  as 
to  the  effect  of  that  same  concentrated  authority  on  the  relative 
expense  of  the  government  \ 

Mr.  Taft. —  Yes ;  I  think  it  is  —  of  course  it  is  unwise  to 
institute  a  comparison  where  a  comparison  is  not  possible  —  but 
NI  should  think  that  a,  priori,  you  might  say  that  the  more  you 
concentrate  authority  in  the  executive,  the  greater  control  he  has 
over  the  economical  expenditure  of  money,  and,  therefore,  that 
it  would  be  likely  to  save  money.  _J 

Mr.  Tanner. —  Isn't  that  the  same  system  followed  in  every 
big  business  corporation  ? 

Mr.  Taft. —  Yes ;  it  is ;  every  one. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  Are  there  any  further  questions,  gentlemen  ? 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Mr.  President,  my  committee,  the  Committee 
on  Finance,  has  been  investigating  into  the  budget  methods  of 
the  State  of  New  York.     We  find  the  situation  here  is  somewhat 


Doc.  No.   11  12 

like  what  1  remember  to  have  been  the  ease  iu  the  Federal  govern- 
ment. The  estimates  are  made  up  by  the  different  bureaus  who, 
in  the  State  of  New  York,  seem  to  have  the  same  idea  as  to  the 
importance  of  their  various  bureaus  that  you  have  described  their 
having  in  the  Federal  government  and,  as  a  result,  the  different 
estimates  when  they  are  prepared  and  sent  to  the  Legislature  are 
regularly  so  high  that  the  Legislature  does  not  pay  much  attention 
to  them,  and  begins  over  again.  They  go  to  the  Legislature 
through  the  Comptroller  of  the  State,  under  a  statute  which  was 
passed  in  1010,  but  the  Comptroller  has  no  power  to  revise  them 
or  cut  them. down.  He  simply  transmits  them  —  collates  them 
and  transmits  them  to  the  Legislature.  When  they  go  to  the 
Legislature  they  are  handled  by  one  committee,  the  Committee 
on  Ways  and  Means,  in  that  respect  differing  from  the  Congress, 
where  in  the  House  of  representatives  they  are  handled  by  some 
eight  committees.  The  Legislature  seems  to  be  quite  similar, 
in  some  of  its  characteristics,  to  Congress.  We  find  that  it  is 
quite  as  favorite  a  thing  to  pass  bridge  bills  in  the  Legislature 
for  the  benefit  of  different  districts  as  it  was  to  pass  post-office 
bills  or  public  building  bills  in  Congress.  But,  at  any  rate, 
after  they  reach  the  Legislature  there  is  no  restriction  upon 
additions  for  private  bills. 

That  presents  the  problem  which  this  committee  has  been  con- 
sidering. There  is  this  additional  great  difference  in  the  State: 
That  here  the  Governor  has  the  power  to  veto  separate  items  in 
the  appropriation  bills  when  they  come  through,  and  the  Presi- 
dent has  only  the  power  to  veto  the  whole  bill  or  nothing. 

Now,  I  am  sure  that  the  Committee  on  Finance  would  be  very 
glad  to  hear  the  history  of  your  efforts  to  introduce  a  better 
system  in  the  Federal  government  than  what  you  found  there. 

Mr.  Taft. —  Well,  when  T  entered  office  I  had  a  very  strong 
purpose  to  reduce  expenses,  if  I  could,  and  so  when  the  estimates 
began  to  come  in  I  examined  the  law  and  found  that  the  esti- 
mates never  touched  me  at  all.  The  chiefs  of  bureaus  got  up  the 
estimates  and  submitted  them  to  the  heads  of  departments,  and 
the  heads  of  departments  sent  them  on  to  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury,  and  he  made  out  the  comparative  statement  that  I  have 
already  referred  to,  and  the  President  had  nothing  to  <!<>  with  it.. 


13  Doc.  No.  11 

The  first  embarrassment  that  I  felt  was  that  1  did  not  know 
how  to  save.  I  wanted  to.  I  was  anxious  to  put  in  the  knife 
and  cut  down  the  appropriations  that  seemed  to  me  to  he  running 
high,  but  I  had  not  any  information.  I  could  send  for  the  head 
of  the  department,  and  he  would  say  the  bureau  chief  says  this 
must  be  spent  and  that  must  be  spent,  and  there  was  no  means 
of  finding  out  just  where,  because  I  was  not  sufficiently  familiar 
with  all  the  departments  —  just  where  that  economy  could  be 
effected  that  I  was  seeking ;  so  I  first  issued  an'  order  that  not  an 
estimate  should  be  sent  in  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  until 
it  had  been  submitted  to  me,  and  then  I  got  out  a  club  and  told 
the  head  of  every  department  he  would  have  to  cut  down,  and  I 
.made  him  cut  so  that  I  cut  about  fifty  or  sixty  or,  perhaps, 
seventy  millions  out  of  the  appropriations,  and  I  thought  I  was 
doing  a  big  thing.  I  notified  Congress  that  1  had  done  so,  and 
that  I  had  cut  to  the  quick,  and  that  we  ought  not,  therefore,  to 
be  treated  as  we  had  been  theretofore  by  the  Appropriation  Com- 
mittee, namely,  to  be  treated  as  if  we  had  sent  in  about  25  per 
cent,  more  than  we  needed,  expecting  it  to  be  cut  down  that 
amount.  But  Congress  did  not  act  on  that  basis.  They  thought 
I  was  lying  about  it  (laughter)  or  that  those  who  were  talking 
to  me  were  lying  about  it,  and  so  they  proceeded  to  cut  in  respect 
to  those  matters  that  the  particular  committee  was  not  specially 
interested  in.  (Laughter.)  That  is  where  they  cut  (laughter) 
and  the  consequence  was  that  when  I  got  through  I  found  that 
the  cuts  had  not  been  made  judiciously  or  with  knowledge,  and 
that  within  the  next  year  we  had  to  provide  deficiency  appro- 
priations to  meet  cuts  that  had  not  been  wisely  made,  largely 
because  it  was  not  possible  under  the  information  available  to 
know  where  economy  could  be  effected.  So  I  induced  Congress 
to  give  us  an  Economy  and  Efficiency  Commission,  and  set  them 
to  work,  and  the  first  thing  they  did  was  to  find  out  what  the 
government  was  that  we  had.  There  was  not  a  statement  any- 
where in  a  comprehensive  form  that  enabled  you  to  know  what 
the  various  functions  were  that  were  being  performed.  You 
could  go.  through  the  statutes,  if  you  hadn't  anything  else  to  do, 
and  you  had  three  or  four  years  to  do  it  in,  and  find  out  all 
those  functions,  and  that  is  the  first  thing  that  the  Economv  and 


Doc.  No.  11  14 

Efficiency  Commission  did,  and  they  made  a  most  comprehensive 
statement  carrying  the  activities  of  the  government  down  to  the 
last  man  —  to  the  last  bureau  and  office  and  commission,  and 
then  to  the  last  man  —  so  that  if  you  consult  it  you  can  find  out 
just  what  his  function  is  in  government.  Congress  never  printed 
that.  It  is  there  and  some  day  it  will  be  useful,  when  they  wipe 
the  dust  off  those  volumes,  because  it  will  be  taken  as  the  basis 
for  an  addition  to  bring  it  up  to  date,  and  then  it  will  be  a  map 
which  can  be  examined  and  consulted  for  the  purpose  of  knowing 
what  is  the  government,  with  reference  to  determining  where 
there  are  overlapping  functions  and  where  economy  can  be  intro- 
duced. Having  done  that,  then  they  went  on  to  make  various 
examinations  for  the  purpose  of  showing  by  illustration  how 
the  economies1  could  be  introduced  into  the  various  departments, 
how  methods  of  business  efficiency  could  be  introduced  that  would 
save  to  the  government  a  considerable  amount  of  money. 

Of  course,  these  amounts  to  be  saved  are  not  large,  as  com- 
pared with  the  River  and  Harbor  Bill  or  the  Navy  Bill  or  the 
Army  Bill,  and  so  it  is  like  that  old  darkey  who  consulted  his 
master  as  to  how  many  would  be  saved.  He  wanted  to  know 
if  half  would  be  saved,  and  his  master  said  he  didn't  think  there 
Would  be.  Finally  he  got  down  to  a  sixty-fourth,  and  the  master 
wasn't  certain,  and  the  darkey  said,  "  Well,  master,  I  don't  think 
there's  any  use  puttering  about  it."  (Laughter.)  And  that  is 
the  difficulty  with  these  efforts  to  save.  You  have  got  to  begin 
with  the  small  things.  That  is  what  the  heads  of  all  these  great 
industrial  organizations  do,  and  in  the  end  they  make  a  great 
economy.  But  we  haven't  the  patience  in  our  political  govern- 
ment to  begin  that  way;  at  least  we  haven't  up  to  this  date.  Per- 
haps we  will  have  later  on,  because  the  pressure  of  expense  is 
growing  heavier  each  year  and  ultimately  Congress  may  see  the 
necessity. 

Now  we  went  on,  and  finally  I  directed,  after  these  examples 
had  been  made  by  the  commission  to  show  how  many  economies 
could  be  effected,  then  I  asked  the  commission — they  made  reports 
recommending  budgets  and  the  preparation  of  a  proper  budget. 
They  prepared  the  budget  for  one  year;  that  is,  they  transposed 
what  had  been  a  statement  of  the  estimates  and  the  appropriation 


15  Doc.  No.  11 

and  put  it  in  the  form  of  what  they  thought  a  proper  budget 
should  contain,  and  having  done  that,  I  sent  it  in  to  Congress 
with  a  message  recommending  it  —  and  thereupon  Congress 
promptly  passed  a  statute  providing  that  no  clerk  in  the  govern- 
ment should  be  used  in  the  preparation  of  the  budget  —  that  I 
announced  I  expected  to  send  in  to  the  next  Congress.  Con- 
gress didn't  have  any  power  to  limit  what  I  should  send  in  to  the 
next  Congress,  and  I  told  the  heads  of  departments  to  disregard 
that  statute. 

I  observed  my  friend,  Mr.  Fitzgerald,  was  here  the  other  day 
and  said  that  they  did  not  propose  to  have  a  budget  sent  in  in  that 
form.  He  isn't  quite  ingenuous  in  that  regard.  There  was  not 
any  doubt  about  our  sending  in  the  old  estimates,  because  the 
old  statute  required  us  to  send  in  the  old  estimate.  What  they 
were  trying  to  do  was  to  prevent  my  sending  in  a  new  estimate 
in  addition ;  but  they  did  not  do  it,  because  1  sent  it  in ;  but  that 
is  preserved  under  the  dust.  (Laughter.)  It  doesn't  need  any  — 
(Laughter.)  Now,  that  budget  was  accompanied  by  a  statement 
of  the  financial  condition  of  the  government.  I  don't  think  that 
it  will  cause  heart  disease  to  gentlemen  familiar  with  the  opera- 
tions of  the  New  York  State  government  to  have  me  say  that  it 
is  very  difficult  to  get  at  the  financial  condition  of  the  United 
States  government.      (Laughter.) 

The  treasury  statement  is  very  much  better  now  than  it  was, 
and  Mr.  McVeagh  improved  it,  and  the  recommendations  of  the 
Economy  Commission  in  some  respects  were  followed,  but  it  is 
very  difficult  to  state  a  balance,  as  to  how  much  money  there 
is  in  the  treasury  available  for  general  appropriation.  There 
is  so  much  money  against  which  there  are  liabilities  that  it  is 
difficult  to  dig  out.  The  Economy  and  Efficiency  Commission 
found  that  there  were  some  funds  supposed  to  be  available  for 
general  appropriation,  against  which  there  were  liabilities 
amounting  to  about  twenty  millions  of  dollars. 

(Now,  part  of  the  budget  statement  should  be  a  statement  of 
the  financial  condition  of  the  government,  so  that  Congress  may 
know  how  much  money  there  is  in  the  treasury ;  so  that  the 
executive  may  know  how  much  money  there  is  in  the  treasury, 
and  how  much  revenue  is  needed  in  addition  to  pay  the  expenses 
and  to  meet  the  expenditures  that  are  proposed. 


Doc.  No.   11  16 

I  became  convinced  that  there  was  no  hope  of  real  economy 
in  the  Federal  government  unless  Congress  passed  an  act  giving 
to  the  executive  the  power  and  the  means  to  prepare  a  full  state- 
ment of  the  expenditures  for  which  he  was  willing  to  become 
responsible,  after  consultation  with  his  cabinet,  and  then  a  full 
statement  as  to  how  those  expenditures  were  to  be  met.  And 
then,  having  made  himself  responsible  for  that,  give  him  the 
opportunity  to  send  his  representatives  on  the  floor  of  the  House 
to  accompany  those  bills  through  both  houses  and  argue  out  the 
question.  But  it  is  objected  that  that  won't  work.  Well,  I  think 
it  will.  There  have  been  two  committees  of  the  ablest  men  in 
Congress,  one  in  the  House  and  one  in  the  Senate,  have  recom- 
mended that  system ;  and  while  it  is  not  the  English  system,  in 
that  they  are  not  members  of  the  House,  Congress  has  the  power 
to  give  them  every  function  and  every  faculty  that  a  member  of 
the  House  has,  except  that  of  votingj  I  observe  Mr.  Fitzgerald 
thinks  they  won't  be  there.  Well,  I  think  they  will  be  there  if 
they  are  interested  in  defending  the  administration,  and  I  think 
they  will  take  part  in  a  running  debate.  I  know  some  members 
of  the  cabinet  that  would  like  to.  I  know  some  that  would  like 
to  get  there.  (Laughter.)  It  is  not  pleasant  being  pounded 
at  the  other  end  of  the  avenue  without  having  an  opportunity  to 
explain,  and  I  think  they  would  be  on  the  floor  and  I  think  that 
they  would  really  help  Congress  with  reference  to  the  actual 
facts  of  the  running  of  each  department  and  the  actual  question 
of  what  expenditures  are  necessary  and  what  are  not. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  Isn't  it  a  fact,  within  the  notice  of  everybody 
who  has  watched  the  debates,  that  Congress  has  debated  for 
hours  and  days  over  a  question  which  a  single  answer  from  the 
man  who  knew  would  put  an  end  to  ? 

Mr.  Taft. —  Oh,  yes;  often;  often.  The  budget  ought  to  state 
the  expenses  in  such  ;i  way  as  to  show  them  in  several  different 
forms,  so  as  to  bring  to  the  attention  of  Congress  how  much  money 
is  to  be  expended  for  particular  activities,  so  that  the  President, 
in  recommending  what  the  expenses  shall  be,  may  be  able  to 
point  out  that  he  has  saved  here  in  order  that  this  activity  may 
not  suffer,  and  that  the  other  may  be  cut  down  without  damage; 
so  that  he  may  give  to   Congress  the  sense  of  proportion  that 


17  Doc.  No.  11 

prevailed  in  the  cabinet  when  the  sum  total  was  found  to  be  too 
great,  and  the  compromise  was  effected  by  the  sacrifice  of  certain 
expenditures  in  order  that  the  more  important  ones  should  be 
provided  for. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  The  difference  between  making  economy  with 
a  pruning  knife  and  making  it  with  an  axe. 

'Mr.  Taft. —  That  is  just  it  exactly.  Then  you  make  it  with 
knowledge,  and  you  have  a  statement  put  before  you  by  which 
you  are  able  to  shape  a  financial  policy,  and  then  you  make  your 
provision  for  the  revenue  by  passing  additional  revenue  laws,  if 
necessary,  or  borrowing  money,  if  necessary,  for  some  object  that 
might  very  well  be  paid  for  gradually  and  transferred  in  part  to 
posterity. 

Mr.  Stimso^nt. —  Well,  when  Mr.  Fitzgerald  was  here,  Mr. 
President,  he  argued  very  strongly  for  very  much  the  same  sort  of 
system  you  have  described,  except  for  the  point  of  having  the 
cabinet  officers  go  on  to  the  floor. 

Mr.  Taft. —  Well,  I  regard  him  as  a  brand  plucked  from  the 
burning.      (  Laughter. ) 

Mr.  Beach. —  Mr.  President,  when  President  Root  in  his  open- 
ing address  before  this  Convention  made  his  remarks,  he  said  in 
substance,  amongst  other  things,  that  giving  a  man  responsibility 
without  power  was  only  a  little  short  of  giving  a  man  power  with- 
out responsibility.  When  Congressman  Fitzgerald  was  before  the 
Committee  on  State  Finances,  he  was  asked  the  question  whether 
in  his  opinion  it  would  be  advisable  for  a  government  official,  a 
cabinet  officer,  to  appear  before  Congress  and  advocate  the  meas- 
ures which  related  to  his  department.  And  he  said  no,  because 
the  prestige  of  such  an  officer  would  enable  him  to  prepare  his 
argument  in  advance,  to  send  it  out  to  the  newspapers  to  be  re- 
leased upon  a  certain  date, — 

Mr.  Taft. —  Something  that  no  Congressman  ever  did. 
(Laughter.) 

Mr.  Beach. — And  which  would  carry  such  a  prestige  that 
the  little  Congressman  who  answered  would  lose  his  remarks  in 


Doc.  No.  11  18 

the  Congressional  Record.  Now,  what  1  would  like  to  ask  you  is 
whether  Congressman  Fitzgerald  is  right,  or  whether  their  being- 
asked  these  questions  by  any  one  of  these  Congressmen  would  not 
enforce  the  cabinet  officer's  being  more  thoroughly  prepared  upon 
all  the  details  of  his  department  than  he  is  now  \ 

Mr.  Taft. —  Oh,  undoubtedly.  It  would  make  better  cabinet 
officers.  It  would  make  the  President  look  about  and  have  a  man 
who  could  stand  on  his  feet  and  answer  and  protect  the  adminis- 
tration in  Congress,  and  that  is  the  kind  of  man  we  ought  to  have. 
This  idea  that  a  cabinet  officer  on  the  floor  of  the  House  would 
overawe  the  Congressmen,  that  was  just  a  bit  of  humor  by  Mr. 
Fitzgerald,  that's  all.  (Laughter.)  I  had  this  experience:  The 
Filipinos  did  not  have  any  representative  when  I  was  Secretary 
of  War,  and  I  wanted  to  get  through  some  legislation,  and  I  went 
up  to  the  Senate  to  ask  for  it.  They  do  let  the  heads  of  depart- 
ments on  the  floor  of  the  House.     That  is  a  great  concession. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Without  the  privilege  of  speaking. 

Mr.  Taft. —  Yes ;  without  the  privilege  speaking.  And  I  went 
up  and  went  on  to  the  floor  of  the  Senate  and  spoke  to  one  Senator 
and  asked  him  if  he  would  not  bring  up  a  bill  that  was  pending. 
The  committee  had  recommitted  it,  and  I  would  like  to  get  it  up 
for  passage  because  it  was  needed  in  the  Philippines,  and  he  said, 
"  No,  I  won't  do  that."  And  I  said,  "  You  are  second  on  the 
committee  and  the  Chairman  is  away,  and  I  thought  you  might 
act  for  him,"  and  he  said,  "  I  am  against  that,  and  I  am  against 
your  whole  policy  in  the  Philippines,  and  I  won't  help  you  at  all. 
Anyhow,"  he  said,  "  what  are  you  here  for  ?"  He  said,  "  You 
are  lobbying."  I  said,  "  I  am  here  because  there  is  nobody  l" 
represent  the  Philippines,  and  I  want  to  help  those  people  ou1 
there,  and  this  is  going  to  help  them."  "  Well,"  he  said,  "  I  am 
a  friend  of  yours,  but  I  want  to  tell  you  that  your  being  on  the 
floor  is  noticed.  It  is  working  against  you."  He  said,  "  1 
am  in  favor  of  separating  the  legislative  from  the  executive." 
This  is  when  I  was  Secretary  of  War.  "  Well,"  I  said,  "  look 
here,  Senator,  what  do  you  come  down  to  my  department  for  and 
intervene  with  reference  to  what  1  am  to  do  in  the  Secretary  of 
War's  position?"  "Oh,"  he  said,  "that's  different;  that's  per- 
sonal."     (Laughter.) 


19  Doc.  No.  11 

Now,  it  would  be  a  change,  a  very  considerable  change,  but  1 
think  it  would  be  for  the  better.  I  think  that  this  matter  of  pub- 
lication would  be  attended  to  by  the  gentlemen ;  that  would  be  a 
personal  matter.  (Laughter.)  It  would  be  a  question  of  publicity 
and  that  is  a  personal  matter  ordinarily  (laughter)  ;  but  with  refer- 
ence to  the  added  efficiency  in  legislative  action,  I  have  no  doubt 
at  all,  because  it  would  enable  them  to  know  quickly.  Of  course 
men  would  differ  in  being  able  to  present  what  the  facts  would  be 
in  respect  to  appropriations  and  general  legislation,  but  I  should 
think  that  a  man  who  was  very  familiar  with  the  department,  as 
the  head  of  the  department  would  certainly  come  to  be,  if  he  was 
to  be  exposed  to  the  searching  questions  and  examination  and  at- 
tacks that  would  be  made  on  the  floor  of  the  House,  that  it  would 
result  in  a  great  deal  of  useful  knowledge  being  imparted  to  the 
members  of  Congress,  and  so  would  help  legislation  and  accurate 
knowledge  of  the  conditions. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  President  Lowell  this  afternoon  explained  to 
these  committees  the  workings  of  that  same  method  of  asking- 
questions,  Question  Day  in  the  House  of  Commons,  and  explained 
the  importance  which  it  was  there  as  a  constant  oversight  and 
supervision  over  the  workings  of  the  executive  department  which 
was  kept  up  by  Parliament. 

Mr.  Taft. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Do  you  see  any  reason  why  it  would  not  work 
well  in  our  government  ? 

Mr.  Taft. —  I  should  think  it  would.  Of  course  I  suppose  a 
rule  would  be  put  in  such  as  they  have,  I  believe,  in  the  English 
Parliament,  by  which  it  goes  over  for  one  day  if  the  minister 
asked  desires  it,  and  then  it  comes  up  the  next  day  for  answer. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  He  can  have  the  question  put  in  writing,  with 
a  day's  notice,  if  he  desires  ? 

Mr.  Taft. —  Yes,  but  as  I  understand  it,  they  have  a  running 
debate,  and  questions  are  asked  of  the  minister  if  the  debate  sug- 
gests the  question ;  and  they  certainly  might  here. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Well,  now,  one  further  thing,  Mr.  President. 
When  Mr.  Fitzgerald  was  here,  he  argued  very  strongly  as  a  part 


Doc.  No.   11  20 

of  the  system  that  when  the  budget  which  he  unites  with  you  in 
urging-  that  it  should  be  prepared  by  the  executive,  when  this 
budget  comes  to  — 

Mr.  Taft. — Well,  now,  wait  a  minute  about  that  budget.  I  saw 
Mr.  Fitzgerald  said  that  we  had  a  budget  there  that  if  the  execu- 
tive had  only  performed  his  duty  they  would  have  had  a  budget. 
Well,  they  do  have  a  statute,  and  I  have  recited  what  it  was :  That 
every  bureau  chief  should  prepare  estimates  for  the  head  of  the  de- 
partment and  the  head  of  the  department  should  send  those  esti- 
mates to  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  and  then  the  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury  should  send  it  on  with  this  comparative  statement 
to  the  Appropriation  Committee  of  the  House  of  Representatives. 
There  is  no  power  anywhere  in  the  statute  anywhere,  and  Congress 
did  not  intend  there  should  be,  by  which  the  estimates  of  the  heads 
of  departments  should  be  cut  down  with  respect  to  the  total,  at  all. 
There  is  no  —  well,  you  can  call  it  a  budget  if  you  want  to,  but  it 
is  a  budget  in  respect  to  which  no  one  has  any  discretion  in 
arranging  it  with  reference  to  its  total  and  with  —  and  it  is  true 
the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  if  he  adds  up  those  totals  made  by 
these  earnest,  enthusiastic  bureau  chiefs,  who  want  to  get  all  the 
money  they  can  in  order  to  exalt  their  own  bureaus  and  make  them 
as  useful  as  possible,  then  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  having 
taken  that  total  has  to  look  around  and  see  if  there  is  enough  money 
in  the  treasury  under  the  ordinary  revenue  acts  to  meet  those  ex- 
penses, and  that  is  the  only  kind  of  a  budget  there  is. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  But  Mr.  Fitzgerald  urged  very  strongly  as  ;in 
ideal  system  that  that  power  to  revise  should  be  given  to  the 
executive  so  that  he  could  present  a  budget  which  was  a  revised 
budget  and  a  cut-down  budget. 

Mr.  Taft. —  Yes,  but  he  did  say  —  lie  did  say  that  if  the  ex- 
ecutive had  executed  that  law,  that  then  they  would  have  had  a 
very  line  budget.        1  want  to  get  it  in  the  record.      (Laughter.) 

'Mr.  STIMSON. —  In  the  absence  of  Mr.  Fitzgerald,  I  am  merely 
trying  to  — 

Mr.  Taft.— That's  all  right. 

Mr.  SriMso  ..  -I  wanted  to  represenl  what  1  understood  he 
had  said. 


21  Doc.  No.   11 

Mr.  Taft. —  That's  all  right.  1  am  delighted  to  welcome  Mr. 
Fitzgerald  over  on  the  other  side.  It  is  one  of  the  satisfactions 
of  my  retirement  to  see  that  since  I  have  left  he  has  become  con- 
vinced. (Laughter.)  And  it  is  a  victory  that  shows  the  merit 
there  is  in  the  cause,  because  I  want  to  say  for  Mr.  Fitzgerald  that 
he  has  been  struggling  for  economy  all  the  time  that  I  have  known 
him.  lie  has  been  the  head  of  the  Appropriations  Committee. 
The  head  of  the  Appropriations  Committee,  and  the  members 
of  that  committee  are  about  the  only  economists  there  are  in  Con- 
gress, and  they  have  great  difficulty,  because  all  of  these  other 
committees,  the  Army  and  the  Navy  Committee,  and  the  Post- 
office  Committee,  and  the  Agricultural  Committee,  and  the  Indian 
Committee,  and  the  Pension  Committee,  they  are  all  looking 
around  with  mouths  open  to  get  as  much  appropriation  as  they 
can,  and  the  only  brake  is  the  head  of  the  Appropriation  Com- 
mittee and  those  who  stand  behind  him,  and  he  has  been  through 
the  fire;  he  has  been  tested  and  now  he  comes  out  purer  in  his 
thoughts  and  in  his  views  of  what  ought  to  be  done,  and  I  am  glad 
to  welcome  him  over  as  a  convert.     (Laughter.) 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Well,  Mr.  President,  as  the  result  of  that  ordeal 
by  fire  (laughter)  Mr.  Fitzgerald  recommended  very  strongly  that 
when  this  budget  which  should  be  prepared  by  the  executive  was 
finally  transmitted  to  Congress,  that  Congress,  while  it  had  the 
power  to  cut  it  down,  should  not  have  the  power  to  raise  it  unless 
by  some  very  preponderating  vote,  like  a  two-thirds  or  a  three- 
fourths  vote.  In  other  words,  that  there  should  be  a  brake  put 
upon  the  power  of  Congress  to  raise  the  estimates  sent  in  by  the 
executives  after  they  got  there.  What  can  you  say  about  the 
desirability  of  such  a  provision  as  that  ? 

Mr.  Taft. —  Well,  I  think  it  would  be  a  most  admirable  thing 
if  we  could  get  it  in  the  Federal  system. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  Well,  of  course,  here  we  are  revising  the  State 
Constitution  so  that  this  Convention  has  the  right  to  put  it  into 
the  State  government. 

Mr.  Taft.- —  I  am  coming  to  that.  I  understand  that.  I  think 
if  we  could  get  it  in  the  Federal  system,  it  would  be  most  admir- 
able.    I  don't  think  ]\Ir.  Fitzgerald  has  said  that  there  was  any 


Doc.  No.  11  22 

reasonable  hope  that  in  the  future  it  would  be  introduced  in  the 
federal  system,  has  he  ? 

Mr.  Stimson. —  By  Congress  itself  ? 

Mr.  Taft. —  Oh,  by  act  or  statute. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  The  only  way  it  can  come  in  the  Federal  sys- 
tem is  by  the  act  of  Congress  itself. 

Mr.  Taft. —  Well,  I  think  a  Constitutional  amendment  would 
be  just  about  as  easy  as  the  action  of  Congress  itself  in  that  re- 
gard. (Laughter.  Of  course,  Mr.  Fitzgerald  looks  at  it  from 
the  standpoint  that  you  do  and  I  do.  He  is  really  in  favor  of 
reducing  appropriations,  and  he  is  very  much  opposed  to  these 
leakages  that  arise  from  log-rolling  measures,  and  he  struggled 
most  sincerely  to  bring  it  about,  and  he  has  reached  the  conclusion 
you  state. 

Now  you  in  New  York  have  the  great  advantage  that  in  your 
present  Constitution,  you  have  already  given  the  Governor  the 
power,  after  your  appropriations  have  been  made,  and  after  your 
budget  has  been  formed  and  adopted,  of  cutting  it  down,  as  he 
chooses. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Not  altogether.  He  can  only  cut  out  whole 
items.    He  cannot  reduce  them. 

Mr.  Taft. —  That  is  a  very  important  power,  but  it  seems  to 
me  it  is  at  the  wrong  end.  If  you  treat  the  function  as  the  one 
that  the  Legislature  has  or  that  Parliament  had,  namely,  of  hold- 
ing the  King  to  an  accountability  with  reference  to  the  money  that 
he  proposes  to  spend,  and  refuse  to  him  the  petition  that  he  made 
to  them  to  allow  him  the  authority  to  spend  it,  then  their  function, 
as  it  has  come  down  to  us,  was  that  of  cutting  down  and  not  of 
increasing,  and  the  standing  order  of  the  House  of  Commons  was 
that  no  appropriation  could  be  increased  except  on  a  motion  of  the 
government.  Of  course  that,  when  it  first  was  adopted,  referred 
to  the  action  of  the  King;  but  it  has  now  come  to  mean  these 
who  are  responsible  for  the  Executive,  namely,  those  who  arc 
the  leaders  of  the  majority  in  the  Lower  House.  ^But  as  you  have 
here  now  the  power  of  the  Governor  to  cut  at  the  end ;  why,  hero 
your  people  are  accustomed  to  the  Governor's  limiting  appropria- 


23  Doc.  No.  11 

tions  after  the  legislative  power  has  been  exercised, —  the  power 
to  take  money  out  of  the  treasury  by  the  Legislature, —  now  why 
don't  you  shift  it  around  and  let  the  Governor  exercise  that  power 
in  the  beginning,  and  then  make  him  responsible  to  the  Legisla- 
ture;, so  that  the  Legislature  can  cut  down  and  not  increase.  I 
think  that  would  be  an  admirable  change,  and  you  put  the  re- 
sponsibility of  proposing  the  budget  where  it  ought  to  be,  on  the 
executive.  He  is  the  man  who  has  the  responsibility  of  execution ; 
he  is  the  man  who  spends  the  money ;  he  knows  and  has  the  means 
of  knowing  where  the  money  is  to  be  spent.  If  the  Legislature 
wishes  to  adopt  a  general  policy  and  pass  general  legislation  that 
involves  expenditure,  of  course  he  would  then  have  to  put  that  into 
the  budget  that  is  to  be  prepared,  but  in  the  matter  of  detailed 
expenditure,  in  the  matter  where  real  efficiency  and  economy  is 
to  be  worked  out  executively,  he  is  the  one  that  ought  to  have  that 
power  and  responsibility;  and  by  sending  it  in  in  that  form  and 
limiting  the  power  of  the  Legislature  to  add  to  it,  you  take  away 
that  weakness  that  legislatures  and  congresses  have,  and  that 
weakness  that  the  people  have.  That  is  all  there  is  about  it.  We 
might  as  well  look  right  down  to  the  source  of  power.  It  is  the 
people  in  each  district,  in  each  Congressional  district  and  in  each 
county  that  want  to  get  for  themselves  something  out  of  the  State 
treasury.  Xow,  if  you  make  the  Governor  responsible,  you  will 
save  the  people  from  their  own  weakness  in  that  regard.  They 
think  more  of  a  bridge  or  a  post-office  or  something  in  their  town 
than  they  do  of  the  general  condition  of  the  treasury.  V  It  is  for 
the  people  in  the  district.  You  talk  to  a  man  who  comes  from  the 
interior  and  he  says,  "  These  river  and  harbor  bills  are  horrible, 
horrible.  They  are  bankrupting  the  treasury  and  making  this  in- 
come tax  necessary,1 "  and  everything  of  that  sort,  and  then  you 
ask  him  about  that  $500,000  postoffice  in  a  town  needing  only  a 
$100,000  postoffice,  and  he  says,  "  Well,  this  government  is  a  great 
government,  and  it  needs  a  dignified  place  for  its  offices." 
(Laughter.)  So  that  I  think  if  you  could  introduce  that  into  the 
federal  government,  I  should  think  it  would  be  admirable;  but 
here  you  have  the  step  already  taken  in  the  case  of  the  Governor, 
and  all  you  have  to  do  is  just  to  turn  it  over  —  just  to  make  the 
exercise  of  that  power  a  little  earlier  in  the  adoption  of  the 
budget^ 


Doc.  No.   11  24 

Mr.  Low. —  Well,  Mr.  President,  isn't  there  really  a  vital  prin- 
ciple involved  in  that  turnover  that  you  recommend  \ 

Mr.  Taft.—  What  is  it  ? 

Mr.  Low. —  It  seems  to  me  to  be  this :  By  the  present  system  in 
New  York  State,  the  representatives  of  the  people  in  the  Legis- 
lature say,  "  Here  is  so  much  money  3-011  can  spend,"  and  the 
Governor  says  how  much  he  will  take.  It  seems  to  me  that  the 
true  policy  is  that  the  Governor  should  say  to  the  Legislature, 
"  We  need  so  much  to  run  the  government/'  and  the  Legislature 
says,  'k  You  can  have  this  and  no  more."  In  other  words,  they 
protect  or  ought  to  protect  the  purse  by  saying  how  much  can  be 
spent.  At  present  our  practice,  i  think,  precisely  reverses  what 
ought  to  be  the  relation  between  the  executive  and  the  legislative. 

Mr.  Taft. —  Well,  it  would  be  a  reversal  in  that  sense;  but  I 
am  talking  from  the  standpoint  of  getting  it  through. 

Mr.  Low. —  I  understand. 

Mr.  Taft.- —  I  mean  of  having  the  popular  mind  adjusted  to  a 
situation  where  a  member  of  the  Legislature  cannot  get  a  bridge 
just  because  the  people  of  his  district  want  it. 

Mr.  Low. —  I  am  in  perfect  sympathy  with  your  proposal. 

Mr.  Taft. —  I  agree  it  is  a  change  in  the  function  that  the 
Legislature  performs. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  You  are  calling  attention  to  the  sugar  coat  of 
the  pill  and  Dr.  Low  is  calling  attention  to  the  medicinal  proper- 
ties inside. 

Mr.  Taft. —  Yes.  It  makes  the  Legislature  a  brake  upon  tin 
expenditure  recommended  by  the  Governor,  instead  of  the  Gov 
emor  being  a  brake  upon  the  expenditure  adopted  by  the  Legis- 
lature. 

A I  r.  Low. —  Precisely. 

Mr.  Taft. — And  the  burden  of  expense  in  the  State  govern 
ment  and  in  the  national  governmenl  is  growing  so  rapidly  tka 
something  must  be  done,  and  if  you  would  only  follow  in  tlii 
great  Empire  State  of  New  York  a  new  model,  why  you  would 


25  Doc.  No.  11 

be  building  better  than  you  know.  It  will  influence  constitutions 
everywhere,  if  it  works,  as  it  seems  to  me  that  it  would  work,  to 
your  great  benefit. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  Mr.  Fitzgerald  called  attention  to  a  number 
of  instances  that  I  think  you  are  probably  familiar  with  of  the 
way  in  which  it  would  work  in  economy.  He  mentioned  how  lone; 
it  took  Congress  to  economize  as  to  the  customs  agencies,  and  the 
pension  agencies. 

Mr.  Taft. —  Why,  they  fought  —  they  fought,  well,  I  think  it 
was  five  or  six  Congresses,  over  the  question  whether  they  should 
give  up  pension  agencies  in  three  or  four  towns  where  they  were 
not  needed  at  all.     Everybody  agreed  they  were  not  needed. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  The  Executive  was  recommending  it  year  after 
year  ? 

Mr.  Taft. —  Yes.  It  would  pass  one  house,  and  then  the;* 
would  hold  up  in  conference  these  great  appropriation  bills  for 
millions  of  dollars  just  on  the  question  whether  two  or  three  pen- 
sion agents  should  be  retained  in  one  or  two  towns  that  were  in 
critical  States.  (Laughter.)  I  tell  you,  an  economist  in  Congress 
under  certain  conditions,  has  a  hard  time.  (Laughter.)  And  Mr. 
Fitzgerald  has  my  deep  sympathy.  I  know.  I  know.  What  is 
everybody's  business  is  nobody's  business,  and  the  responsibility 
for  the  expenditures  is  not  felt  except  in  one  day  in  Congress,  and 
that  is  when  the  leaders  of  the  House  —  the  leader  of  the  House 
and  the  leader  of  the  opposition,  or,  rather,  the  Appropriation 
Committee,  get  up  to  explain  on  the  one  hand  how  economical 
they  have  been,  and  on  the  other  hand  how  extravagant  they  have 
been,  and  everyone  who  hears  them  knows  in  his  heart  that  both 
speeches  are  buncombe,  because  in  most  of  the  extravagant  esti- 
mates, both  parties  are  responsible.  It  is  so  with  the  Eiver  and 
Harbor  Bill,  and  it  is  so  with  the  Public  Buildings  Bill ;  it  is  so 
with  the  Sundry  Civil  Bill,  and  there  are  roses  that  grow  over  the 
party  wall  (laughter)  in  their  respective  appropriations.  (Laugh- 
ter and  applause.) 

Air.  Srnrsox. —  Mr.  President,  isn't  the  real  vice  in  the  present 
system  that  Congress  is  put  in  the  position  of  trying  to  criticize 


Doc.  No.  11  26 

its  own  work  where  in  the  method  you  propose  Congress  would  ho 
criticizing  the  work  of  the  executive  \ 

Mr.  Taft. —  Yes ;  that  is  it  exactly ;  it  would. 

Mr.  Stimson. — And  it  would  therefore  do  it  much  more 
thoroughly  ? 

Mr.  Taft. —  That  is  it,  exactly.  Mr.  Fitzgerald  —  I  am  a 
great  admirer  of  Mr.  Fitzgerald.  He  got  up  and  told  the  truth  in 
Congress  once.  (Laughter.)  He  said  —  well,  that's  a  very  good 
record.  (Laughter.)  He  said,  "Gentlemen,  this  business  of  ap- 
propriating money  as  we  have  gone  on  with  it  in  this  House  and 
in  this  Congress,  is  a  horrible  mess."  And  it  was,  and  it  is 
(laughter)  under  the  system  that  there  prevails.  I  did  not  mean 
to  limit  Mr.  Fitzgerald  (laughter)  in  his  truthful  statements; 
but  that  one  impressed  me.      (Laughter.) 

Mr.  Sttmson. —  Have  any  of  the  gentlemen  of  the  Committee 
any  questions  that  they  would  like  to  ask  Mr.  Taft  ? 

Mr.  Paesons. —  Mr.  President  —  I  would  like  to  ask  a  question. 

Mr.  Taft. —  How  do  you  do,  Mr.  Parsons  ? 

Mr.  Parsons. —  One  of  the  arguments  in  favor  of  the  present 
system  is  that  the  passing  of  an  appropriation  bill  is  a  legislative 
function,  and  that  our  system  of  government  leads  to  the  separa- 
tion of  the  executive  from  the  legislative.  You  said  in  the  Philip- 
pines, you  were  as  an  executive  also  in  the  legislative  branch  of 
the  government.     Did  you  find  that  worked  well  or  ill? 

Mr.  Taft. —  1  thought  it  worked  well.  I  have  no  nightmare 
about  this  union  of  the  legislative  and  the  executive.  I  think  it 
is  not  well  to  be  dogmatic  on  such  a  proposition.  I  think  one  of 
the  difficulties  we  find  in  our  government  is  the  rigid  exclusion  or 
the  attempt  to  make  a  rigid  separation  between  the  two,  and  I 
think  there  might  be  greater  union,  with  greater  efficiency  in  the 
matter  of  government  on  the  one  hand,  and  greater  economy. 

Mr.  Parsons. —  When  the  fundamental  law  for  tin1  govern- 
ment of  the  Philippines  was  to  be  drafted,  you  had  to  do  with  it, 
and  that  distinction  was  obliterated,  was  it  not  ? 


27  Doc.  No.  11 

Mr.  Taft. —  It  was.  That  is,  there  were  five  —  let's  see  - — 
were  there  —  yes,  there  were  five  members  of  the  executive  that 
constituted  the  majority  of  the  eight  who  were  the  legislature. 

Mr.  Parsons. — And  that  distinction  was  also  obliterated  when 
the  law  was  passed  for  the  government  of  Porto  Rico,  was  it  not  ? 

Mr.  Taft. —  I  think  it  was.  I  am  not  so  familiar  with  Porto 
Rico,  but  I  think  —  I  think  the  members  of  the  executive  were 
the  members  of  the  upper  house  there. 

Mr.  Parsons. —  So  that  the  administration  of  Mr.  McKinley 
and  the  Congress  did  not  hestitate  to  obliterate  that  distinction  ? 

Mr.  Taft. —  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Parsons. — And  no  ill  effects  have  come  from  obliterating 
it? 

Mr.  Taft. —  No.,  sir.  The  only  ill  effects  have  come  when  they 
have  introduced  the  second  body  —  the  lower  House —  out  there. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  But,  Mr.  President,  in  the  suggestions  you  have 
made  as  to  the  budget,  there  is  no  obliteration  at  all ;  the  two 
branches  of  the  government  — 

Mr.  Taft. —  Oh,  no. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Remain  wholly  separate.  It  is  simply  the 
proposition  of  introducing  better  working  relations  between  two 
branches  of  government  whose  origin  remains  quite  distinct. 

Mr.  Taft. —  Congress  could  —  I  presume  —  impose  this  limi- 
tation on  itself,  but  here  in  your  Constitutional  Convention,  you 
don't  have  to  depend  upon  a  self-imposed  limitation. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  But  in  the  suggestions  that  you  have  made  that 
the  executive  should  recommend  a  budget,  and  that  his  cabinet 
officers  should  be  allowed  to  support  it,  it  is  merely  carrying  into  a 
little  more  workable  form,  the  relations  he  has  now  in  recommend- 
ing legislation  ? 

Mr.  Taft. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  It  does  not  at  all  obliterate  the  distinction  be- 
tween the  way  in  which  the  executive  is  elected  on  the  one  hand, 
and  the  legislature  on  the  other  ? 


Doc.  No.  11  28 

Mr.  Taft. —  It  is  merely  making  him  an  active  figure  instead 
of  a  figurehead.     That  is  all. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  It  is  only  allowing  it  to  be  done  in  the  natural 
and  normal  way  instead  of  artificially? 

Mr.  Taft. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Cullinan.- —  Mr.  President,  I  understand  from  you  that 
you  think  in  the  State  of  New  York  our  system  of  check  on  im- 
proper appropriations  by  the  Governor  is  good,  hut  might  be  im- 


011 


proved 

Mr.  Taft. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  Yes.  Well,  then,  do  I  understand  that  you 
believe  that  that  method  is  superior  to  the  condition  in  the  Federal 
government  ? 

Mr.  Taft. —  Well,  with  respect  to  the  Federal  government,  I 
have  had  my  doubts  as  to  the  wisdom  of  having  the  President 
veto  items  in  an  appropriation  bill.  The  President  has  a  good  deal 
of  power  anyhow,  and  there  are  a  good  many  items  in  an  appro- 
priation bill.  There  are  a  good  many  items  in  which  Congressmen 
are  personally  interested,  and  I  don't  think  that  is  a  good  way  to 
increase  that  power  of  the  President.  I  think  it  might  give  him  too 
great  power.  I  think  if  you  made  him  responsible  for  a  budget 
in  advance,  and  prevented  Congress  from  cutting  it  down,  it  would 
be  a  good  deal  safer  in  the  matter  of  extending  powers  to  the 
President  than  it  would  be  to  give  him  the  right  in  the  end  to 
pick  out  and  eliminate.  I  don't  know  how  it  has  worked  in  New 
York.  I  am  not  familiar  with  it,  but  with  my  general  knowledge 
of  political  agencies  I  should  think  it  might  be  made  an  instru- 
ment of  very  considerable  influence.     (Laughter.) 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  Well,  Mr.  President,  assuming  that  the  Presi- 
dent had  the  power  to  control  the  budget  in  advance,  would  he  — 
do  you  think  he  would  be  exempt  from  the  influences  that  you 
say  exist  in  the  case  of  the  departments  sending  in  their  budgets ; 
that  is,  having  an  exaggerated  idea  as  to  how  money  should  be 
spent  ? 

Mr.  Taft. —  You  mean  that  he  would  wish  to  spend  money  — 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  Yes. 


29  Doc.  No.  11 

Mr.  Taft. —  No;  oh,  no;  no,  sir.  The  burden  on  the  Presi- 
dent with  reference  to  economy  is  too  great.  It  is  the  fellow 
who  is  in  an  isolated  bureau  or  department  that  gets  the  swelled 
head  about  the  necessity  for  supporting  his  particular  bureau, 
but  with  the  whole  field  before  him  and  with  the  responsibility 
for  the  expenses  of  the  government  such  as  would  be  on  him, 
you  can  trust  the  President  to  wish  to  have  as  much  economy  as 
possible,  and  under  this  system,  if  he  did  not,  there  would  be  the 
House  to  cut  it  down.  When  they  could  not  do  anything  except 
cut  it  down  they  are  likely  to  exercise  the  function.    (Laughter.) 

Mr.  Cullinan.—  Well,  Mr.  President,  we  might  have  a  bad 
Governor  in  this  State. 

Mr.  Taft. —  Yes,  I  know  you  might  have  a  bad  Governor  in  it, 
and  if  you  are  working  on  the  principle  that  you  are  going  to 
have  a  bad  Governor,  and,  therefore,  you  ought  to  shackle  him 
and  put  handcuffs  on  him,  then  you  won't  get  any  government 
at  all.  I  don't  agree  to  the  theory  that  because  a  bad  man  might 
get  into  a  position  of  responsibility,  where  in  order  to  do  the 
people's  work  he  has  got  to  have  the  power,  that  with  that  power 
he  might  injure  the  people,  therefore  you  ought  to  withhold  the 
power —  I  don't  agree  to  that  at  all.  I  think  if  you  do,  we  will 
have  an  ineffective  government. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  In  other  words,  you  believe  in  judging  a 
system  by  its  merits  and  not  by  its  demerits. 

Mr.  Taft. —  I  do.     I  am  opposed  to  an  insurance  so  heavy 

against  dishonesty  that  it  interferes  with  efficiency. 

Mr.  Stimso^. —  Have  any  other  members  of  the  Committee 
any  questions  to  ask  the  President? 

I  think  I  voice  the  sentiment  of  the  entire  membership  of  both 
committees,  as  well  as  our  fellow  delegates  who  have  heard  you 
this  evening,  Mr.  Taft,  when  I  say  that  we  are  very  greath 
indebted  to  you  for  coming  here  and  for  giving  us  this  very  clear 
presentation  of  a  difficult  subject- 
Mr.  Taft. —  No  indebtedness  at  all,  gentlemen.  You  have  not 
had  as  much  fun  as  I  have.     (Laughter.) 

Whereupon,  at  0  :35  o'clock  p.  m.,  the  meeting  adjourned. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  12 


REPLY  OF  THE  LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR  AND  ACTING 
GOVERNOR  TO  RESOLUTION  OF  THE  CONVENTION 


State  of  New  York  —  Executive  Chamber 

Albany,  June  8,  1915 
Hon.  Jesse  S.  Phillips,  Chairman,  Library  Information  Com- 
mittee, Constitutional  Convention,  Albany,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. —  In  reply  to  the  resolution  adopted  by  the  Consti- 
tution Convention  on  May  20,  1915,  I  have  the  honor  to  make  the 
following  report: 

1.  The  number  of  prisoners  confined  in  the  several  State 
prisons,  reformatories  and  penitentiaries  of  the  State  on  January 
2,  1915,  was: 

Sing  Sing  prison,  Ossining 1,563 

Auburn  prison,  Auburn 1,462 

Clinton  prison,  Dannemora 1,386 

Great  Meadow  prison,  Comstock 641 

Women's  prison,  Auburn 107 


Doc.  No.  12  2 

Dannemora  State  Hospital,  Daxmemora 321 

Matteawan  State  Hospital,   Beacon 119 

State  Farm  for  Women,  Valatie 31 

New  York  State  Reformatory,  Elmira 1,386 

Eastern  New  York  Reformatory,  Napanoch 447 

New  York  State  Reformatory  for  Women,  Bedford.  .  .  421 

Western  House  of  Refuge  for  Women,  Albion 244 

Albany  County  Penitentiary,  Albany 546 

Erie  County  Penitentiary,  Buffalo 1,021 

Monroe  County  Penitentiary,  Rochester 471 

New  York  County  Penitentiary,  Blackwell's  Island.  .  .  2,115 

Onondaga  County  Penitentiary,  Jamesville 506 

Total 12,817 


2.  The  number  of  applications  for  pardon  and  commutation  of 

sentence,  respectively,  filed  in  the  Executive  Department  during 

each  of  the  years  from  1900  to  1915: 

New  New- 

Year  Applications      Year  Applications 

1900 267  1908 252 

1901 251  1909 310 

1902 218  1910 347 

1903 202  1911 .. 381 

1904 286  1912 743 

1905 310  1913 662 

1906 373  1914 655 

1907 277  = 

(Note.)  The  foregoing  arc  new  applications  only,  and  at  least 
fifty  per  cent,  of  the  old  applicants  which  would  be  about  800  who 
apply  each  year. 

3.  The  number  of  pardons  and  commutations  granted  or  re- 
fused in  each  of  the  said  years : 


Year 

1000. 

1901 
1902. 
1903, 
190-1, 
1905. 
1900. 
1907. 
1908. 
1909. 
1910. 
1911. 
1912. 
1913. 
1914. 


4.  The  number  of  applications  for  pardons  and  commutations 
of  sentence,  respectively,  pending  and  undetermined  in  the  Execu- 
tive Department  on  January  1,  1915,  was  1,396. 

5.  The  number  of  applications  for  pardon  and  commutation  of 
sentence  filed  since  January  1,  1915,  is  160. 

6.  The  number  of  applications  for  pardon  and  commutation  of 
sentence  disposed  of  and  the  disposition  made  of  them  since 
January  1,  1915,  is  as  follows: 

Pardoned 5 

Commuted 3 

Respited 2 

Denied,  about  . 20 


Doc. 

No.  12 

Granted 

Refused 

Respites 

41 

2 

47 

Q 

44 

•2 

48 

6 

46 

From 

1 

66 

200 

1 

67 

to 

3 

15 

400 

0 

14 

each 
year. 

0 

19 

<■> 

22 

3 

55 

3 

78 

5 

8 

1 

24 

7 

Doc.  No.  12  4 

The  Governor  also  examines  thoroughly  all  capital  cases.  The 
number  passed  on  and  denied  since  1900  is : 

Year  No. 

1900 3 

1901 7 

1902 3 

1903 13 

1904 8 

1905 7 

1906 0 

1907 8 

1908 6 

1909 12 

1910 12 

1911 13 

1912 22 

1913 13 

1914 11 

1915,  until  June  1st 7 

All  of  which  is  respectfully  submitted. 

EDWAKD  SCHOENEOK, 
Lieutenant-Governor  and  Acting  Governor. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN   CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  13 


JOINT  MEETING  OF  THE  GOVERNOR  AND  OTHER 
STATE  OFFICERS  AND  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  STATE 
FINANCES,  REVENUES  AND  EXPENDITURES,  WITH 
HON.  FRANK  J.  GOODNOW,  PRESIDENT  OF  JOHNS 
HOPKINS  UNIVERSITY 


Senate  Chamber,  The  Capitol 

Albany,  June  3,  1915,  2:30  o'clock  p.  m. 

Hon.  Frederick  C.  Tanner  and  Henry  L.  Stimson  occupied 
the  chairs  of  their  respective  committees. 

jlr.  Stimson. —  Will  the  Committee  kindly  come  to  order? 
Gentlemen,  we  have,  as  you  know,  to-day  the  pleasure  of  having 
with  us  Doctor  Goodnow,  the  President  of  Johns  Hopkins  Uni- 
versity, of  Baltimore.  Doctor  Goodnow  formerly  occupied  the 
chair  of  administrative  law  in  Columbia  University,  in  which  he 
made  a  study  of  the  various  systems  of  law  not  only  in  this 
country  but  in  other  nations,  and  he  has  had  since  then  the 
unique  experience  of  being  appointed  the  Constitutional  Adviser 
of  the  New  Eepublic  of  China.  So  that  his  experience  ranges 
from  the  observation  of  the  oldest  republic  in  the  Occident  to  the 
youngest  republic  in  the  Orient. 


Doc.  No.  18  2 

I  asked  Doctor  Goodnow  to  come  before  the  Committee  on 
Finance  primarily  in  reference  to  the  budget  systems  which  he 
had  observed.  For  the  benefit,  Doctor,  of  carrying  out  your  sug- 
gestion that  you  wish  to  have  this  a  perfectly  informal  hearing, 
I  will  tell  you  merely  in  outline,  what  has  been  before  the  Com- 
mittee already. 

The  Committee  on  State  Finances  started  in  with  an  investiga- 
tion into  the  methods  of  fiscal  legislation  which  are  now  in  use 
in  the  State  of  New  York.  We  examined  a  number  of  gentlemen 
on  this  subject  and,  as  you  doubtless  know  from  your  studies,  the 
system  here  consists  of  having  the  departmental  estimate  coming 
from  the  bureaus  and  different  boards  which  constitute  the  various 
branches  of  the  Government  of  the  State  of  New  York,  pass 
through  the  hands  of  the  Comptroller,  under  the  Law  of  1910, 
and  be  transmitted  by  him  to  the  Legislature  which  then  — 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  May  I  ask,  does  that  law  provide  that  the 
Comptroller  can  exercise  any  supervision  over  the  estimates  ? 

Mr.  Stimsox. — Absolutely  no.  He  has  no  power  of  revision 
whatever ;  he  can  merely  collate  these  different  estimates  and 
transmit  them  in  the  same  amount  in  which  he  receives  them  to 
the  Legislature.  The  Legislature  then  makes  up  the  various 
appropriation  bills  and  passes  thean  and  they  are  in  turn  trans- 
mitted to  the  Governor;  and,  under  our  Constitution,  the  Gov- 
ernor has  the  power  to  veto  items  but  not  reduce  items  in  the 
appropriation  bill.     With  that,  you  are  doubtless  familiar. 

With  that  as  its  starting  point,  the  Committee  have  had  before 
it  gentlemen  who  have  told  it  about  the  various  systems  of  budgets 
and  rudimentary  budgets  which  are  in  effect  in  the  various  cities 
of  New  York  State.  Comptroller  Prendergast  came  before  us 
in  regard  to  the  method  of  New  York  city;  other  gentlemen  have 
been  before  us  in  regard  to  the  methods  employed  under  charters 
of  cities  of  the  second  class.  Last  week  we  had  Mr.  Fitzgerald, 
the  Chairman  of  the  Appropriation  Committee  of  the  House  of 
Representatives,  who  gave  us  his  experience  with  the  methods  in 
the  National  Congress  and  made  certain  recommendations  based 
on  his  observations  there. 

I  think  that  covers  in  substance  the  subject  matter  which  has 
been  before  my  Committee.    Mr.  Tanner  will  tell  vou  the  matters 


3  Doc.  No.  13 

which  have  come  before  his  Committee,  either  now  or,  if  you 
prefer  it,  later  at  your  convenience.  And  we  would  like  to  leave 
the  entire  matter  and  method  of  your  progress  and  what  you 
have  to  say  to  you.  The  Committee,  I  am  sure,  will  be  very  glad 
of  your  suggestion  that  you  would  like  to  have  questions  asked. 

Doctor  Goodnow  says  that  he  'has  not  prepared  at  all  to  make 
a  formal  statement  or  address  to  the  Committee,  but  he  would 
like  to  have  questions  asked  about  the  various  things  that  he  may 
touch  upon.  I  have  given  you,  perhaps,  an  outline  of  what  is  in 
our  mind.  Tf  you  desire  any  more  or  have  any  questions  I  will 
be  glad  to  answer  any  questions  on  our  part. 

\Doctor  Goodnow. —  Mr.  Chairman,  and  gentlemen  of  the  com- 
mittee: VThe  main,  practical  work  that  I  have  done  in  connection 
with  budget  making,  was  done  in  connection  with  the  work  that 
was  done  by  the  Commission  on  Economy  and  Efficiency,  that  was 
appointed  by  President  Taft,  and  we  did  make  a  rather  detailed 
examination  of  budget  methods  as  applied  in  the  Federal  govern- 
ment. 'Now,  I  should  judge  from  what  Mr.  Stimson  has  said  as  to 
the  methods  which  are  adopted  here  in  the  State  of  New  York, 
that  there  is  no  opportunity  for  any  administrative  supervision 
over  the  estimates  that  are  to  go  before  the  Legislature  prior  to 
the  time  that  the  appropriation  acts  have  been  passed.  Of  course, 
subsequent  to  the  passage  of  appropriations  the  power  which  the 
Governor  has  of  vetoing  a  specific  item  in  the  appropriation  bill 
permits  him  at  rather  a  later  date  in  the  proceedings  to  exercise 
something  in  the  way  of  an  administrative  or  an  executive  super- 
vision. I  should  not  think,  however,  that  that  was  the  proper  time 
for  such  a  supervision  to  be  exercised,  and  that,  as  the  result  of 
the  time  when  it  is  exercised,  it  could  not,  in  the  nature  of  things, 
be  very  effective.  It  cannot  be  very  effective  because  of  the  fact 
that  the  power  of  the  Governor  is  confined  to  cutting  out  absolutely 
an  item  of  the  bill  and  unless  the  appropriations  are  in  great  detail 
he  could  only  exercise  the  supervision  over  the  expenditures  by 
perhaps  cutting  out  a  very  large  item,  which  it  would  be  better  to 
have  reduced  rather  than  to  have  cut  out  entirely. 

So  that  it  seems  to  me  that  the  system  that  you  have  here  is  very 
little  better  than  the  system  which  has  been  developed  in  connec- 
tion with  the  estimates  of  the  United  States  government,  where 


Doc.  No.   13  4 

the  President  has  only,  in  one  instance,  the  right  to  exercise  any- 
thing in  the  nature  of  supervision  over  the  estimates,  and  that  is, 
when  the  estimates  as  a  whole,  are  or  seem  to  be  in  excess  of  the 
revenues.     In  that  case  alone  can  he  exercise  any  supervision. 

I  suppose  the  Governor  is  in  a  somewhat  similar  position  to 
the  President  with  regard  to  the  exercise  of  any  power  of  super- 
vision over  the  estimate,  that  is,  the  President,  I  know  and  I 
imagine,  I  don't  know  whether  I  am  right  in  that  assumption, 
the  Governor  too  has  no  adequate  force  upon  whom  he  can  rely, 
and  that  being  the  case,  he  cannot  exercise  a  power  of  supervision 
with  the  intelligence,  at  any  rate,  that  it  ought  to  be  exercised. 

So  that,  I  think  you  may  say,  as  I  see  the  situation  here,  that 
there  is  no  effective  provision  made  under  the  system  adopted  in 
New  York  to  afford  the  exercise  of  an  administrative  supervision 
over  the  estimates.  So  that  the  State  must  rely  then,  in  large 
measure,  upon  the  work  that  is  done  in  the  Legislature,  in  the 
committees,  in  the  same  way  that  Washington  has  to  place  reliance 
upon  the  work  of  the  committees  of  Congress.J> 

I  don't  know,  Mr.  Stimson  did  not  mention  that,  but  in  the 
State  of  New  York,  I  don't  know  whether  all  appropriations  come 
up  from  one  committee. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  They  do,  in  the  State  of  New  York,  unlike  the 
Federal  government. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Then  you  can  have  a  birdseye  view  from  — 

Mr.  Stimson. —  The  Ways  and  Means  Committee  has  such  a 
birdseye  view. 

Doctor  Goodnow. — ■  So  that  the  legislative  committee  work  can 
be  exercised  more  effectually  than  in  Congress. 

It  seems  to  me  one  of  the  great  disadvantages  of  this  method, 
in  the  absence  of  any  effective  administrative  supervision  over  the 
estimates,  is  that  in  the  first  place,  there  is  altogether  too  great  an 
administrative  independence,  and  the  tendency  of  almost  every 
administrative  authority  which  desires  to  spend  money  is  to 
magnify  the  importance  of  its  department  and  thereby  to  increase 
the  estimate,  very  often  unduly,  and  unless  the  estimate  of  the 
separate  administrative  departments  can  be  brought  before  one 
administrative  authority,  which  can  cut  them  down,  in  view  of 


5  Doc.  No.  13 

the  needs  of  the  service  generally  and  also  in  view  of  the  revenue 
of  the  State,  this  method  of  making  the  estimate  would  seem  to 
me  irresistibly  to  tend  towards  extravagance. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  May  I  interrupt  you  to  ask  you  a  question  on 
what  you  have  just  said  there? 

Doctor  Goodxow. —  Certainly. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  Have  you  considered  whether  or  not  there 
would  be  any  advantage,  assuming  that  the  estimates  were  to  be 
revised,  either  by  the  executive  branch  of  the  government  before 
they  went  to  the  Legislature  or  afterwards  by  the  Legislature  itself, 
in  a  central  committee,  have  you  considered  at  all  the  advantages 
or  disadvantages  which  those  two  branches  of  the  government 
would  have  in  this  particular  duty  of  cutting  down  the  estimate, 
arising  out  of  any  superior  information  which  one  might  have  of 
the  activities  of  the  government  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow.—  Certainly,  the  Governor,  if  he  were  given 
the  necessary  assistance,  part  of  which  would  have  to  be  technical 
in  character,  would  be  at  a  very  much  greater  advantage  in  this 
matter  than  the  Legislature  could  be.  Merely  as  a  result  of  being 
in  control  of  the  administrative  system  of  the  State,  the  Governor 
can  know  more  about  it  than  the  ordinary  committee  of  the  Legis- 
lature could  be  expected  to  know;  and,  as  a  result  of  his  knowledge 
of  the  needs  of  a  particular  department,  as  a  result  of  his  knowl- 
edge of  the  revenue  that  is  available,  it  would  be  my  opinion  that 
that  supervision  can  be  exercised  much  more  intelligently.  And 
I  think  we  find  in  most  governments  which  have  been  forced,  as 
the  result  of  the  demands  that  are  made  upon  them,  to  adopt  ways 
which  will  favor  economy,  that  there  always  is  provided  some 
method  for  an  administrative  supervision  of  the  estimates  before 
they  go  to  the  Legislature.  I  think  you  have  noticed  that.  I 
am  more  familiar  with  the  British  system  and  their  practice  — 
well,  all  the  important  expenditures  have  to  be  approved  by  the 
treasury  and  they  do  not  go  up  before  the  Legislature  until  there 
has  been  an  agreement  reached  between  the  department  asking 
for  the  money  and  the  treasury  as  to  the  amount  which  will  be 
granted  for  particular  purposes  of  expenditures. 


Doc.  JSTo.   13  6 

Mr.  Stimsow. —  That  particular  phase  of  the  matter  has  not 
been  before  us,  Doctor  Goodnow.  If  you  care  to  go  into  it  in 
greater  detail,  I  am  sure  the  Committee  would  appreciate  it. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  As  I  understand  the  British  system,  all 
expenditures,  except  military  expenditures,  have  to  receive  the 
consent  of  the  treasury,  all  estimates,  before  they  go  up.  The 
military-naval  expenditures  are  estimated  for  with  a  somewhat 
greater  independence  by  the  War  Department  and  the  Admiralty 
than  are  the  civil  estimates,  but  even  they  cannot  go  up  to  Parlia- 
ment until  they  have  received  the  assent  of  the  Cabinet.  Tt  has 
been  felt,  particularly  with  regard  to  naval  estimates,  that  it 
would  be  inadvisable  to  submit  them  to  the  same  control,  to  the 
exercise  upon  the  part  of  the  treasury  that  the  ordinary  civil 
estimates  are.  But,  in  all  cases,  in  the  ease  of  a  civil  estimate, 
the  supervision  is  exercised  by  the  treasury.  In  the  exercise  of 
military  and  naval  estimates,  the  administrative  supervision  is 
exercised  by  the  Cabinet,  and  they  have  before  them  the  needs 
of  the  different  branches  of  the  service,  the  needs  of  the  country  as 
a  whole,  and  they  have  also  before  them  the  probable  revenue; 
and,  in  viewT  of  a  consideration  of  those  factors,  they  come  to  the 
conclusion  that  such  and  such  items  are  to  be  submitted  to  Parlia- 
ment. 

Mr.  Stimson.— When  you  say  the  civil  estimates  are  super- 
vised by  the  treasury,  through  what  officer  is  that  done  I  Who 
represents  the  treasury? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  They  have  a  particular  bureau  ;  quite  a 
staff  of  officials  whose  duty  it  is  to  supervise  those  estimates  before 
they  can  eome  up.  There  is  this  official  organization  provided  for 
that  in  the  treasury,  which  not  only  has  charge  of  the  estimates 
in  general,  but  which  also  has  general  charge  of  the  salaries  that 
are  to  be  paid  to  different  classes  and  clerks,  and  classifies  the 
clerks  and  fixes  in  particular  departments  clerks  of  certain  classes 
and  a  certain  number  of  them. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Ts  this  special  organization  that  you  speak  of, 
are  they  subordinates  of  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  \ 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes,  sir.     Tie  is  the  head. 


7  Doc  AT<».    L3 

Mr.  Stimson. — And  he  is  a  member  of  the  Cabinet  I 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Ves,  sir;  he  is  a  member  of  the  Cabinet. 

Mr.  Dick. —  He  is  also  a  member  of  the  House  of  Commons  \ 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Dick. —  All  Cabinet  officers  are  members  of  the  House  of 
Commons  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Either  the  House  of  Commons  or  the 
House  of  Lords. 

The  same  thing  occurs  in  Canada,  but  the  supervision  is  exer- 
cised there  more  by  the  Cabinet  as  a  whole,  and  the  estimates  have 
to  be  decided  on  by  the  Cabinet  as  a  whole,  before  being  submitted 
to  Parliament. 

As  I  was  saying,  that  seems  to  prevent  the  undue  development 
of  extravagance,  through  perfectly  proper  motives,  through  the 
heads  of  departments.  Each  head  of  department  wants' to  extend 
his  department,  and  naturally  is  apt  to  overestimate  the  impor- 
tance of  that  particular  branch  of  their  work,  and  this  check, 
through  an  efficient  and  effective  administrative  supervision,  has 
been  of  value  in  keeping  the  estimates  down,  and  also  in  keeping 
them  within  the  revenue  which  is  available. 

There  is  another  reason  why  it  seems  to  me  that  there  ought  to 
be  a  provision  for  an  administrative  supervision  of  the  estimates, 
and  that  is  to  prevent  a  thing  that  a  popular  government  seems  to 
be  liable  to,  wherever  you  find  it,  and  particularly  where,  as  is 
usually  the  case,  the  representatives  in  the  Legislature  represent 
local  districts.  That  is,  there  is  an  irresistible  tendency,  which 
is  to  my  mind  one  of  the  most  dangerous  tendencies  of  popular 
government  towards  useless  expenditures  in  localities  for  the 
purpose  of  influencing  locally  the  influence  and  standing  of  the 
representative  in  the  Legislature.  There  is  not  any  use  enlarg- 
ing upon  it.  Any  of  you  men  who  have  been  members  of  the 
Legislature  know  what  pressure  is  brought  to  bear,  and  how  dif- 
ficult it  is  to  resist;  but  if  you  are  locking  at  the  general  ques- 
tion of  popular  government,  as  you  are.  and  you  must  in  the 
Constitutional  Convention,  from  the  point  of  view  of  necessity, 
if  popular  government  is  to  continue,  as  it  has,  as  to  the  guarding 
against  the  evils  which  are  apparently  inevitable,  it  seems  to  me 


Doc.  No.   13  8 

that  it  is  necessary  to  provide  some  offset  to  this  tendency,  and 
that  can  be  secured,  it  seems  to  me,  only  by  having  the  estimates 
determined  upon  before  they  are  submitted  to  the  Legislature,  by 
somebody  who  is  representative,  not  of  this  locality  or  of  that 
locality,  but  who  is  representative  of  the  State  as  a  whole.  And, 
therefore,  it  seems  to  be  an  absolute  necessity,  if  we  are  to  keep 
down  the  expenditures  of  the  State  government,  which  are  increas- 
ing at  such  a  tremendously  rapid  rate,  we  must  provide,  in  the 
first  place,  to  check  the  tendency  of  administrative  bodies  towards 
magnifying  their  importance,  and  secondly,  to  check  the  tendency 
of  localities  to  demand  the  expenditure  of  State  money  for  local 
purposes,  and  purposes  which  are  not  consistent  with  the  interests 
of  the  general  State  as  a  whole. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  May  I  ask  a  question  there  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. — ■  Certainly. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Mr.  Dick  asked  you  a  question  in  reference  to 
the  membership  of  the  man  who  exercised  that  scrutiny  in  the 
Cabinet  in  England.  They  have  membership  simultaneously  in 
the  Legislature.  What  I  want  to  ask  you  in  reference  to  that  is, 
does  that  scrutiny,  as  Cabinet  officers,  at  all  take  the  place  of  the 
subsequent  scrutiny  in  Parliament? 

Doctor  Goodnow. — ■  No. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Or  is  it  done  purely  in  their  capacity  as 
executive  officers  for  the  time  being? 

Doctor  Goodxow. —  It  is  purely  done  in  their  capacity  as 
executive  officers,  and,  of  course,  those  estimates,  after  they. have 
been  scrutinized  in  that  way  by  the  administration,  then  they  are 
submitted  to  Parliament,  and  have  to  go  through  considerable 
scrutiny  there. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Then  they  go  through  the  legislative  scrutiny? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mi-.  Dkic. —  Has  Parliament  the  right  to  increase  that  \ 

Doctor  Goodnow.— You  remember  what  one  man  said  about 
Parliament  :  u  Parliament  can  do  everything  except  make  ;i  man 
a  woman."     Parliament  lias  power  t<>  increase  the  estimates.     But 


9  Doc.  No.  13 

the  House  of  Commons  adopted  about  one  hundred  and  fifty  years 
ago  — 

Mr.  Stimson. — Seventeen  hundred  and  thirteen,  I  think. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Two  hundred  and  two  years  ago. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes.  A  rule  which  makes  out  of  order  any 
proposal  for  the  expenditures  of  money  which  does  not  come  from 
the  Crown,  and  they  live  up  to  that,  so  that  the  estimates  are  not 
raised.  And  apropos  of  that,  in  the  British  North  American  Act 
of  1857,  which  is  practically  the  constitution  of  the  Dominion  of 
Canada,  they  have  incorporated  a  provision  which  is  modelled  on 
that  rule  of  order  of  1713,  and  when  I  was  called  upon,  as  I  was, 
to  draft  a  constitution  for  China  —  which,  by  the  way,  was  not 
adopted  —  I  endeavored  to  modify  that  rule  in  such  a  way  as  to 
be  applicable  to  the  conditions  there,  and  I  think  it  would  be 
applicable  to  the  conditions  here.     I  drafted  it  as  follows: 

"  That  it  shall  not  be  lawful  for  the  'Senate  or  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives to  adopt  or  pass  any  vote,  resolution  or  bill  for  the 
appropriation  of  any  part  of  the  public  revenue,  or  of  any  tax 
to  any  purpose  that  has  not  been  first  recommended  to  that  house 
by  message  of  the  President,  in  the  session  in  which  such  vote, 
resolution  or  bill  is  proposed ;  nor  shall  it  be  lawful  for  either  the 
Senate  or  House  of  Representatives  to  increase  the  amount  recom- 
mended to  that  house  by  the  President  to  be  appropriated  for  any 
purpose." 

And  practically  in  every  English  speaking  country,  except  the 
United  States,  a  rule  of  that  sort  has  been  adopted,  in  order  to 
prevent  this  practice  which  we  have  come  to  call  "  log  rolling  "  in 
this  country,  by  means  of  which  different  representatives  will 
agree  to  vote  for  each  other's  appropriations  if  the  others  will  vote 
for  theirs.  That  is  the  only  practical!  way  which  so  far  has  been 
developed  by  English  speaking  people  to  prevent  this  dangerous 
tendency  of  all  popular  government. 

u  don't  know  as  I  have  anything  more  to  say,  Mr.  Chairman. 
Those  are  the  principal  points  I  had  in  mind.  The  necessity  of 
administrative  supervision  over  the  estimates,  and  the  desirability, 
if  not  the  necessity  of  limiting  the  Legislature  after  the  estimates 


Doc.  No.  13  10 

have  come,  to  cutting  the  estimate  down  or  preventing  them  from 
increasing  it.  \ 

Mr.  Beach. — Can  you  state  how  many  changes  of  executives 
take  place  when  there  is  a  change  in  administration,  under  the 
English  government  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  I  cannot  tell  you  in  actual  numbers.  My 
impression  is  that,  including  the  officers  of  the  household,  there 
are  not  more  than  one  hundred.  About  one  hundred  counting 
the  heads  of  departments  and  then  the  officers  of  the  household. 
There  are  comparatively  few.  The  secretaries  and  the  political 
under  secretaries  are  about  the  only  ones. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  That  provision  which  you  read  from  your  draft 
of  the  constitution  of  'China,  is  that  substantially  the  same  as  the 
provision  in  the  constitution  of  Canada  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow.- —  Substantially,  yes.  It  goes  into  a  little 
more  detail. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Of  course  it  mentions  the  President  instead  of 
the  Premier? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Pelletkeau. —  What  are  the  advantages  of  the  English 
system  of  the  members  of  the  Cabinet  being  likewise  members  of 
the  House  of  Commons  or  of  the  House  of  Lords  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Of  course  the  advantage  then  is  that  they 
are  always  present  in  the  Legislature,  or  may  be  present  in  the 
Legislature,  when  any  important  matter  comes  up.  And,  inas- 
much as  the  English  system  is  really  a  system  in  accordance  with 
which  the  initiative  is  given  to  the  administration  and  the  Legis- 
lature is  merely  to  exercise  a  controlling  influence,  wliy.  it  is 
necessary,  of  course,  it  is  only  fair,  to  give  to  the  Cabinet,  which 
has  the  initiative  plan,  the  right  to  support  it  in  the  Legislature. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Will  you  describe  how  that  is  done;  what  the 
proceedings  are  when  the  budget  is  introduced  in  the  House  of 
Commons  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Well,  I  can  do  it  only  in  a  very  general 
way. 


11  Doc.  No.  13 

Mr.  Stimson. — There  is  a  personal  interrogation  of  the  op- 
ponents ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Stimson.—  By  the  House  itself  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes,  sir ;  and  that  does  not  go  before  any 
special  committee,  but  it  goes  before  a  committee  of  the  whole 
House  and  any  member  of  the  House  may  attend  and  there  is 
considerable  interrogation  upon  the  part  of  the  opponents  of  any 
particular  measure,  and  often  there  is  quite  an  influence  exercised 
over  items  of  the  appropriation  by  the  opponents  of  the  govern- 
ment. If,  however,  the  opponents  of  the  government  insist  upon 
making  too  great  changes,  changes  which  the  Cabinet  could  not 
consent  to,  why  that,  of  course,  would  result  in  an  overthrow  of 
the  Cabinet  and  a  change  of  the  government. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  There  is  a  pretty  full  debate,  isn't  there,  on  the 
issue  of  the  adequacy  of  the  budget? 

Doctor  Goodnow. — Yes,  sir.  That  is,  in  the  Committee  of  the 
Whole. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  I  mean  the  practice  is  to  make  a  motion  to 
reduce  and  test  it  in  that  way  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes.  That  would  be  done  by  the  oppo- 
sition, if  they  think  there  is  any  chance  of  throwing  the  govern- 
ment out. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Isn't  it  also  the  practice  to  interrogate  the 
heads  of  the  respective  departments  when  their  portions  of  the 
budget  come  up  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. — ■  Yes. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  By  the  opposition  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. — ■  Yes. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  To  subject  them  to  examination? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Stimson.  — Personally  ? 


Doc.  No.  13  12 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  But  I  think,  of  course,  there  —  take  it  in 
our  government,  in  the  Federal  government,  and  I  think  in  the 
State,  the  estimates  run,  under  present  practice  we  will  consider 
—  that  is,  I  know  in  the  Federal  government  almost  everybody 
puts  in  an  estimate  much  larger  than  he  expects  to  get,  because, 
as  a  general  principle,  they  are  going  to  be  cut  down. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  That  was  the  testimony  as  to  what  was  done 
here  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow.—  Yes. 

Mr.  Stimson.  — The  witnesses  have  told  us  that  they  are  uni- 
formly so  high  that  the  Legislature  began  over  again  with  little 
regard  to  the  aggregate  of  the  estimates  submitted. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  I  do  not  think  that  is  true  in  Great  Britain. 
The  attempt  there  is  to  make  the  estimate  nearer  what  is  absolutely 
necessary.  Of  course,  there  may  be  debatable  items  upon  which 
money  might  or  might  not  be  spent,  but,  as  a  general  thing,  the 
estimates  are  a  serious  attempt  to  find  out  what  the  needs  of  the 
administration  are,  and  in  this  country  they  are  not. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  The  estimates,  when  they  are  submitted,  after 
this  Cabinet  revision  in  Great  Britain,  present  an  issue  which  the 
government  is  ready  to  stand  on. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  They  do  not  expect  it  to  be  cut  down  '. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  No,  sir ;  and  if  they  should  be  cut  down 
the  government  would  resign. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  They  present  a  subject  for  real  debate  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. — ■  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  You  have  mentioned  what  would  be  a  force 
assisting  the  government,  for  the  purpose  of  assisting  the  Governor, 
in  making  up  this  estimate.  What  is  your  idea  as  to  the  com- 
position of  that  Board  ?  Would  it  bo  heads  of  the  departments  ? 
Would  it  be  men  who  in  the  Federal  government  would  be  Cabinet 
members,  or  who  ? 


13  Doc.  No.  13 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  I  think  the  heads  of  departments  certainly 
ought  to  meet  with  the  Governor.  It  might  be  necessary  for  the 
Governor  to  have  a  staff  somewhat  similar  to  the  staff  which  the 
Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment  of  New  York  City  has. 
in  order  to  consider  a  great  many  of  the  items  intelligently.  You 
would  have  to  have,  of  course,  organized  that  staff  in  accordance 
with  the  needs  of  the  service  here,  but  I  think  there  is  a  pretty 
good  model  for  a  staff  of  that  sort  to  be  found  in  the  staff  attached 
to  the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment  of  New  York  City. 
There  would  have  to  be  something  of  that  sort  in  order  to  have 
the  administrative  supervision  as  serious  and  effective  as  it  ought 
to  be. 

Mr.  Wagxek, —  If  you  had  that  sort  of  department,  wouldn't 
you  simply  transfer  the  log  rolling  to  that  board  rather  than  to 
the  Legislature,  because  they  would  all  be  department  heads  who 
would  be  interested  in  large  appropriations  for  their  departments  \ 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  I  say  that  you  would  have  to  have  some- 
thing in  addition  to  that. 

Mr.  Wagxek. —  Wouldn't  it  be  better  to  have  the  English 
system,  of  four  subordinate  investigators? 

Doctor  Goodnow\ —  You  would  have  to  have  that,  but  I  think 
the  Governor  could  exercise  a  better  supervision  if  he  could  meet 
with  the  heads  of  departments  and  then  I  think  he  ought  to  have 
the  power  to  determine  whether  estimates  should  go  in  finally. 

Mr.  Wagner, —  Would  you  include  in  that  administrative 
supervision  the  requests  of  other  State  elected  officials,  who,  under 
our  theory,  are  to  be  independent  officials  \ 

Doctor  Goodnow. — ■  Yes.  Unless  you  do  that  I  do  not  think 
you  can  —  take,  for  example  the  State  Engineer  and  the  Sur- 
veyor, if  he  is  going  to  expend  a  great  amount  of  money  in  public 
wrorks,  that  is  a  very  important  thing,  I  think,  to  be  subjected  to 
the  control  of  the  government. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  As  a  matter  of  practice,  Doctor,  in  the  Federal 
government,  where  the  heads  of  departments  are  appointed,  doesn't 
the  President  give  the  head  of  department  some  idea  as  to  a  point 


Doc.  No.  13  14 

beyond  which  he  cannot  go  ?    Isn't  that  the  way  it  is  really  worked 
out? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Well,  I  don't  think  it  has  been  until  re- 
cently, because  we  have  never  had  the  necessity  in  the  Federal 
government  of  saving  money.  That  is,  our  revenues  have  come 
in  as  a  result  of  the  collection  of  taxes  which  have  not  been  im- 
posed for  fiscal  purposes.  They  have  been  imposed, —  a  protective 
tariff,  for  example,  has  been  imposed,  not  to  bring  in  money 
particularly,  but  for  other  purposes;  and,  as  you  know,  in  the 
history  of  the  country,  sometimes  a  great  issue  has  been  the  dis- 
position of  a  surplus  and  it  has  only  been  in  recent  years  where 
it  has  come  to  the  point  where  it  has  been  necessary  for  the  Presi- 
dent to  exercise  any  particular  supervision,  and  as  the  law  stands 
at  the  present  time  he  can  not,  except  under  his  constitutional 
powers,  control  the  estimates  that  are  to  go  in  at  times. 

Mr.  Eicoll. —  Did  you  state  to  what  extent  the  estimates  are 
itemized  under  the  English  system  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  They  are  not  itemized  nearly  as  much  as 
our  estimates  are;  that  is,  not  on  the  face  of  them,  but  they  refer 
to  certain  schedules  which  do  go  into  a  considerable  detail,  but 
the  schedules  are  not  regarded  so  much  as  an  itemized  appropria- 
tion that  is  controlling;  and  it  would  be  regarded  as  proper  to 
transfer  balances  from  unexpended  items  to  items  where  the  ex- 
penditure might  be  more  desirable.  That  is,  they  have  adopted 
more  over  there  the  system  that  has  been  adopted  in  some  of  the 
departments  of  the  Federal  government,  which  is  called  there  the 
lump  fund  appropriation. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  In  regard  to  Mr.  Tanner's  question,  really  the 
first  attempt  made  by  any  President  to  regulate  the  estimates  was 
done  at  the  time  you  were  on  that  committee  of  economy  and 
efficiency  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes;   under  Mr.    Taft;   under  an   act  of 

1908. 

Mr.  Stimson". —  Nineteen  hundred  and  nine,  T  think,  to  be 
exact. 


15  Doc.  No.  13 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Was  it  1909? 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Yes. 

Doctor  Goodxow. —  That  act  provided  that  the  President 
should  have  the  right  to  reduce  the  estimate,  or  to  send  in  to 
Congress  suggestions  as  to  reductions  of  the  estimates  or  to  pro- 
vide for  new  revenue.  But,  as  Mr.  Taft  said  when  he  was  here, 
he  had  not  any  force  which  he  could  use  to  make  an  intelligent 
reduction,  and  that  all  he  could  provide  for  was  simply  a  flat 
10  per  cent,  reduction  right  along  the  whole  line.  He  knew  per- 
fectly well  it  was  not  proper  in  certain  cases  and  it  might  do 
hardship  in  certain  cases,  and  it  might  be  not  enough  in  others. 

Mr.  ■Stimsox. — ■  You  mean  by  that  he  virtually  sent  word  to 
each  of  the  department  heads  that  they  had  to  get  their  estimates 
down  — cut  them  down  10  per  cent.  ? 

Doctor  Goodxow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Lincoln. —  What  does  the  House  of  Lords  have  to  do  with 
estimates? 

Doctor  Goodxow. —  Nothing,  since  1911. 

Mr.  Lincoln. —  Can  you  suggest  any  means  of  overcoming 
possible  conflict  between  the  Senate  and  the  Assembly,  or  the  other 
house,  in  connection  with  budget  making  ? 

Doctor  Goodxow. — Nothing,  except  by  adopting  a  somewhat 
similar  provision  to  the  provision  that  was  adopted  in  the  Parlia- 
ment Act  of  1911,  which  provides  that  if  the  House  of  Lords 
does  not  approve  of  a  bill  within  a  month  after  it  comes  before 
it,  then  it  shall  go  through  as  law  without  the  consent  of  the  House 
of  Lords,  unless  the  House  of  Commons  otherwise  directs.  That 
was  passed  as  the  result  of  that  struggle  about  the  Lloyd  George 
budget.  The  Parliament  Act  of  1911  practically  did  away  with 
the  financial  powers  of  the  House  of  Lords. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Doctor  Goodnow,  I  have  sent  out  for  those 
provisions  of  the  rules  of  order  in  the  House  of  Commons  and  of 
the  Parliament  in  Canada.  (Handing  certain  papers  to  the 
witness.) 


Doc.  No.  13  16 

Doctor  Goodnow  (reading.) — The  rule  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons is  that  "  the  House  will  receive  no  petition  for  any  sum 
relating  to  public  service,  or  proceed  upon  any  line  for  a  grant 
or  charge  upon  the  pubiic  revenue  unless  recommended  by  the 
Crown;  "  and  the  Act  of  1867  for  the  Dominion  of  Canada,  it 
reads : 

"  It  shall  not  be  lawful  for  the  House  of  Commons  to  adopt  or 
pass  any  vote,  resolution  or  address,  or  bill,  for  the  appropria- 
tion of  any  part  of  the  public  revenue,  or  of  any  tax  or  imposts 
for  any  purpose  that  has  not  been  first  recommended  to  that 
House  by  a  message  of  the  Governor  General  in  the  session  in 
which  such  vote,  resolution,  address  or  bill  is  proposed." 

Of  course,  you  see  the  House  of  Commons  did  not  consider  — 
way  back  in  1713  —  that  that  was  a  violation  of  its  prerogative; 
it  was  a  self-denying  ordinance.  It  simply  saw  the  necessity  of 
something  of  that  sort  and  said,  "  We  will  not  vote  any  money 
except  as  proposed  to  it  by  the  persons  who  are  responsible  for 
the  expenditure  of  money." 

Mr.  Stimson. —  That  has  been  lived  up  to  inviolately  ever 
since  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  For  200  years  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  For  200  years, 

Mr.  Austin. —  Doctor,  if  I  may  ask  you  a  question,  I  want  to 
say  that  the  system  of  an  executive  budget  appeals  to  me  as  being- 
good.  So  far  as  the  State  of  New  York  is  concerned,  there  is 
only  one  difficulty  in  the  way,  according  to  my  mind,  and  that 
arises  from  this  situation :  It  seems  to  me  that  —  of  course,  a 
budget  to  be  of  any  real  use,  must  be  made  up  by  a  person  having 
knowledge  of  the  facts.  In  Great  Britain  I  think  it  is  a  fact 
that  a  Cabinet,  when  there  is  a  change  of  government,  is  nearly 
always  made  up  of  persons  who  have  been  connected  with  govern- 
mental affairs,  and,  whatever  their  political  affiliations  may  ho. 
they  are  familiar  with  the  needs  of  government  so  far  as  its 
maintenance  is  concerned.  In  this  State  we  all  know  thai  every 
two  years  we  have  a  change  of  government,  and  vow  frequently 


17  Doc.  No.  13 

the  Executive  —  I  think  in  the  majority  of  cases  —  the  Executive 
who  is  elected  is  a  man,  while  of  great  prominence,  may  not 
necessarily  have  any  real  knowledge  of  the  needs  of  the  govern- 
ment from  a  financial  standpoint.  He  must  necessarily  submit 
his  first  estimate  within,  say,  sixty  days  to  the  Legislature  which 
comes  in.  Can  he,  for  his  first  estimate,  be  possessed  of  sufficient 
knowledge  to  present  a  proper  estimate  of  the  State's  needs  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Well,  no. 

Mr.  Austin. —  Well,  on  the  other  hand,  under  our  present 
system,  these  bills  originating  in  the  appropriation  committees 
where  there  is  a  change  of  politics,  the  chairman  of  the  Finance 
Committee  of  the  Senate  and  of  the  Ways  and  Means  Committee 
of  the  Assembly,  although  he  comes  from  a  different  political 
party  from  that  which  just  went  out,  is  nearly  always  a  man  who 
has  been  upon  those  committees  and  has  served  a  number  of  years 
and  is  somewhat  familiar  with  the  needs  of  the  government.  Do 
you  think  that  constantly  changing  government  would  have  any 
effect  upon  the  efficacy  of  an  executive  budget  system  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  It  would,  unless  there  were  gradually 
developed  as  I  think  there  necessarily  would  be,  about  the  Gov- 
ernor, or  subordinate  to  the  Governor,  a  force  which  would  tell 
him  what  should  be  done  in  the  way  of  trimming  down  the 
estimates. 

I  don't,  know  as  you  know  the  condition  of  things  down  in 
Washington,  but  if  Mr.  Cortes,  who  is  the  clerk  of  the  Committee 
on  Appropriations,  were  not  there,  that  Committee  would  not  do 
very  much  business.  He  has  been  there  for  twenty  years,  I  think, 
and  he  knows  the  whole  thing  from  A  to  Z,  and  he  can  give  that 
committee  information  which  no  other  person  probably  living 
could  give  them.  I  think  the  tendency  would  be  here  in  the  State 
for  the  development,  if  this  scheme  were  adopted,  of  something 
in  the  nature  of  a  permanent  service,  just  out  of  the  very  neces- 
sity of  things,  that  would  help  the  Governor  in  the  performance 
of  his  duties.  Records  would  be  kept  which  would  show  what  had 
been  the  appropriations  during  a  series  of  years  preceding,  or  to 
show  what  had  been  the  expenditures  of  those  departments  during 
the  years  preceding,  and  so  on,  so  there  would  be  accumulated 


Doc.  No.  13  18 

very  soon  a  vast  mass  of  information  which  would  help  the  Gov- 
ernor and  he  would  also  have  the  help  of  those  people.  And 
those  people,  I  think  would  necessarily  have  permanent  positions. 
Even  under  our  system  of  changing  officers  pretty  frequently  we 
know  that  in  almost  every  department  there  is  some  man  who  is 
the  wheel  horse  of  the  party  who  stays  there  no  matter  what  may 
be  the  political  power. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  That  is  true  of  Mr.  Fitzgerald's  work. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  'Stimson. —  Mr.  Cortes  knows  more  about  appropriations 
even  than  Mr.  Fitzgerald? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes.     He  has  been  there  longer. 

Mr.  Austin.—  The  point  I  was  getting  at,  is,  if  you  estab- 
lished a  budget  system,  it  would  seem  to  me  that  some  permanent 
investigatory  body  is  necessary? 

Doctor  Goodnow. — ■  Yes. 

Mr.  Austin. —  Without  that  it  would  be  useless,  not  necessarily 
useless,  but  its  usefulness  would  be  greatly  diminished  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  The  same  thing  is  true  in  New  York  in 
the  Board  of  Estimate  and  Apportionment.  In  the  case  of  a 
new  election  where  the  party  is  changed,  the  body  is  completely 
changed,  but  there  is  there  a  permanent  staff  that  helps  them  to 
deal  intelligently  with  the  estimates  that  come  up  from  the  various 
departments. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  It  would  be  helpful  if  the  Governor's  term 
were  four  years  instead  of  two  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  That  would  bo  a  stop  in  the  direction  of  better 
budget  making  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes,  it  would. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  The  Committee  on  Governor  and  Other  State 
Officers  have  confined  themselves  up   to   this  point   to  studying 


19  Doc.  No.  13 

the  executive  branch  of  the  government  as  it  is  and  have  not  made 
any  recommendations.  The  facts  have  been  developed  that  the 
executive  branch  of  the  government  to-day  is  made  up  of  over 
one  hundred  and  fifty  departments,  boards  and  commissions. 
The  Committee  has  been  studying  the  subject  of  co-ordinating 
and  placing  in  one  group  the  various  committees  and  boards  whose 
functions  are  similar  and  properly  belong  together.  From  your 
experience  in  administrative  law,  we  would  be  very  glad  to  have 
you  make  any  suggestions,  either  from  your  knowledge  of  the 
government  of  this  State,  or  by  analogy  with  other  States  or 
Canada  or  England.  In  fact,  we  do  not  wish  to  place  any  limit 
on  you  at  all. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Mr.  Chairman,  I  did  not  suppose  that 
there  was  any  man  that  was  rash  enough  to  advocate  the  adminis- 
trative organization  of  New  York  as  it  at  present  exists,  as  it 
never  was  developed  consciously  upon  the  part  of  the  State.  It 
has  been  a  long  historical  development,  and  the  attempt  has  been 
made,  as  I  have  read  the  history  of  the  State,  to  meet  each  par- 
ticular need  that  presented  itself  by  an  organization,  which,  unfor- 
tunately, in  .a  great  many  instances,  bore  no  relation  to  the  existing 
organization. 

Now,  if  we  go  back  over  the  history  of  the  State,  we  find  that 
the  idea  of  electing  by  the  people  as  a  whole  of  the  administrative 
officers  of  the  government,  that  was  not  originally  the  idea  which 
the  framers  of  the  early  constitution  of  the  State  of  New  York 
had  in  mind.  Almost  all  officers  of  the  early  State  Constitution 
were  appointed  by  the  Governor,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  con- 
sent of,  in  the  first  instance,  the  council  of  appointment,  which 
was  a  council  consisting  of  four  senators,  and  later  by  and  with 
the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate.  And  it  was  only  in  1846 
that  the  State  adopted  in  any  very  large  measure  the  idea  of 
popularly  elected  State  officers.  The  men  in  the  State  offices  that 
were  in  existence  at  that  time  were  to  be  elected  by  the  people  as 
a  whole.  If  we  look  at  the  history  of  the  State  since  then,  I  do 
not  think  that  we  can  come  to  the  conclusion  that  method  of 
popularly  elected  State  officers  has  approved  itself  to  the  people 
of  this  State,  because  practically  every  new  officer  for  whom  pro- 
vision has  been  made  since  those  days  of  1846,  since  that  great 


Doc.  No.   13  20 

democratic  movement  —  I  mean  democratic  in  the  sense  of  popular 
government  —  that  movement,  nearly  every  officer  for  which  pro- 
vision has  been  made  has  been  appointed  by  the  Governor,  either 
alone  or  by  the  Governor  by  and  with  the  consent  and  advice  of 
the  Senate ;  and  up  to  this  time  there  has  been  no  serious  attempt 
made  to  provide  that  these  popularly  elected  officers,  as  provided 
for  by  the  Constitution  of  1846,  shall  be  appointed  by  the  Gov- 
ernor, but  it  is  rather  remarkable  if  you  go  through  it  —  every 
single  officer  for  which  provision  has  been  made  since  then,  is  to 
be  appointed  by  the  Governor  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent 
of  the  Senate,  or  by  the  Governor  alone. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  Practically  all  those  additional  officers,  with 
the  exception  of  the  Superintendent  of  Public  Works  and  the 
Superintendent  of  Prisons,  who  are  constitutional  officers,  were 
added  by  the  Legislature? 

Doctor  Goodxow. —  Yes,  they  have  been  added  by  the  Legis- 
lature. 

Xow,  one  of  the  results  then  of  this  peculiar  development,  where 
you  have,  on  the  one  hand,  officers  elected  by  the  people  of  the 
State  as  a  whole,  and  on  the  other  hand  a  great  majority  of 
officers  appointed  by  the  Governor,  either  alone  or  by  the  Gov- 
ernor and  the  Senate,  has  been  this,  that  somewhere  the  people 
have  not,  or  the  Legislature,  or  the  people  of  the  State  have  not 
been  willing  to  entrust  a  great  many  of  the  new  functions  of 
government  which  have  been  developed  within  the  last  forty  <>r 
fifty  years  to  their  popularly  elected  officers.  It  looks  as  if  they 
have  not  felt  that  they  did  get  an  efficient  government  by  popularly 
elected  officers,  and  that  they  had,  where  those  new  functions  of 
government  have  come  up,  made  purposely  provision  that  those 
people  should  be  appointed  by  the  Governor,  thinking  that  that 
would  give  them  a  better  government. 

Of  course,  having  this  dual  system  in  your  government,  you 
have  a  good  many  instances  where  certain  officers  have  been  dupli- 
cated, functions  of  certain  officers  have  overlapped  the  functions 
of  others,  and  the  condition  at  the  present  time,  I  think,  is  pretty 
chaotic  in  this  Stale. 

Another  thing  that  has  happened  which  1  think  has  been  un- 
fortunate  is   that    there   has   been    no    attempt  made   in    this   new 


21  Doc.  No.  13 

administrative    organization    that  has   developed    since    1846,    to 

co-ordinate  similar  functions  in  one  department,  such  as  we  have 
for  example  at  Washington.  But  you  have  one  board  for  this 
little  thing,  another  officer  for  another  little  thing,  and  so  on 
through  the  line. 

That,  to  my  mind  has  great  disadvantages.  The  most  important 
things  that  occur  to  me  are  these:  In  the  first  place  there  is  a 
great  lack  of  efficiency,  a  great  tendency  toward  extravagance  by 
the  recognition  of  so  many  absolutely  independent  bodies.  Take 
the  National  government  for  example,  as  compared  with  this  gov- 
ernment of  the  State  of  New  York,  a  government  vastly  greater 
in  the  extent  of  its  functions  and  vastly  greater  so  far  as  the 
amount  of  money  is  concerned  which  is  spent,  and  there  are  only, 
I  think,  nine  different  departments  at  the  present  time,  and  very 
few  independent  bodies  outside  of  those  departments.  You  can 
count  them  up  on  the  fingers  of  your  hands,  independent  bodies 
like  the  Civil  Service  Commission,  the  Interstate  Commerce  Com- 
mission, the  Trades  Commissions,  etc.,  and  the  bodies,  in  a  great 
many  instances,  like  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  are  not 
administrative  bodies ;  but  in  the  Federal  government  attempt  has 
been  made,  not  always  as  successful  as  it  might  have  been,  to 
group  all  those  various  services  that  must  be  carried  on  under  the 
administrative  supervision,  under  some  one  head  of  department, 
who  is  usually  a  Cabinet  officer. 

That  has  a  big  advantage  over  this  system  that  has  gradually 
grown  up  in  the  State  government,  because  it  prevents  again  what 
I  have  referred  to,  the  development  of  this  idea  of  departmental 
importance.  There  is  a  superior,  there  is  an  administration  con- 
trol and  supervision  over  most  of  these  services.  Say,  for  example, 
important  service,  like  the  cost  of  geodetic  and  light  house  service, 
they  are  all  subject  to  the  administrative  supervision  of  the  Secre- 
tary of  Commerce,  and  the  tendency  of  his  having  supervision  is 
to  check  extravagance  on  their  part. 

In  the  second  place  the  disadvantage  of  this  scheme  is  with  the 
State  of  New  York  as  it  is,  it  is  very  difficult  for  a  permanent 
service  to  develop  in  this  State.  If  you  take  in  the  United  States 
government  the  tendency  within  the  last  twenty-five  years  has 
been  that  the  heads  of  these  services  which  are  governed  by 
bureaus,  in  the  different  departments,  the  tendency  of  the  heads 


Doc.  No.   13  22 

of  those  services  is  to  become  permanent  without  any  particular 
provision  of  law,  and  the  political  control  there  must  necessarily 
be  exercised  over  them,  if  the  government  of  the  country  is  to  be 
popular ;  that  is,  exercised  by  the  heads  of  departments,  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Cabinet  change  with  the  administration  but  there  is  no 
longer  the  same  tendency  for  a  change  all  the  way  through  the 
line  as  there  was  in  the  old  days.  I  think  the  same  thing  would 
happen  here,  without  any  particular  provision  of  law,  if  you  put 
these  various  one  hundred  and  fifty  officers, —  if  you  attempt  to 
group  them  in  accordance  with  the  character  of  the  function  — 
under  some  head  of  department ;  then  if  you  provide,  say,  if  there 
were  Commissioners  placed  at  the  head  of  them,  if  you  provide 
no  fixed  term  for  the  Commissioner,  but  provide  merely  that  the 
Commissioner  was  to  be  appointed  by  the  Governor  and  could  be 
removed  by  the  Governor  at  any  time,  I  think  you  would  find  that 
the  tendency  pretty  soon  would  be  for  most  of  those  to  become  per- 
manent in  character,  certainly  much  more  permanent  than  they 
are  at  the  present  time.  That,  I  think,  would  vastly  increase  the 
efficiency  of  the  government.  So  that,  on  the  one  hand,  you 
would  save  through  the  administrative  supervision  the  tendency 
toward  extravagance  and  toward  the  magnifying  of  those  various 
little  departments,  and  I  think  the  tendency  would  be  to  secure 
something  in  the  nature  of  a  permanent  service,  which,  of  course, 
would  increase  the  efficiency. 

Mr.  Wagner. — ■  Doctor,  I  think  you  will  find  in  our  different 
departments,  the  heads  of  which  are  elected  by  the  people,  a  per- 
manence in  the  bureaus  within  those  particular  departments. 

Doctor  Goodxoav. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Wagfee. —  They  have  been  in  the  State  service  for  a  good 
many  years,  irrespective  of  their  political  complexion. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  I  was  not  thinking  so  much  of  whether 
you  had  those  people  elected  or  not.  I  don't  know,  I  don't  think 
anyone  would  care  to  speak  about  increasing  the  elective  offices. 
But  I  was  thinking  that  if  you  grouped  them  together  at  the 
present  time,  grouped  the  cognate  offices  together  at  the  presenl 
time  with  a  well  organized  department  with  a  political  head  at 
the  head  of  them,  you  would  not  find  the  commissioners,  who 


23  Doc.  No.  13 

would  correspond  to  the  present  heads,  would  change  as  much  as 
now. 

Mr.  Wagner. —  I  want  to  suggest  that  you  stated  a  moment 
ago  the  fact  that  these  new  functions  of  government  created  in  a 
particular  manner  in  our  State,  in  which  a  new  department  was 
created,  and  the  head  was  made  an  appointed  officer,  rather  than 
having  elective  .officers,  was  due  to  a  mistrust  by  the  legislative 
bodies,  in  the  efficiency  of  elected  officials.  I  do  not  think, 
Doctor,  conceding  your  superior  ability  and  knowledge  as  com- 
pared with  mine  — 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  No,  that  is  only  my  guess,  that  is  all. 

Mr.  Wagner. —  I  think  it  is  due  to  a  great  extent  to  the  fact 
that  most  of  those  reforms  have  been  advocated  by  Governors,  and 
they  have  never  been  quite  willing,  having  advocated  the  reform, 
to  give  up  to  the  whole  people  the  selection  of  the  head  of  that 
department,  and  there  has  been,  even  among  the  Governors,  a 
desire  to  control,  and  perhaps  their  motives  were  perfectly  good, 
they  thought  they  were  in  better  position  to  select  the  head  of  that 
department  than  the  people  themselves  would  be,  but  I  think  it 
is  due  to  the  desire  of  the  Governor  to  control  that  department, 
especially  its  heads,  that  has  made  those  officials  appointive, 
because  without  his  approval  the  legislation  could  not  be  enacted. 

Doctor  Goodnow.— Whenever  the  people  have  had  the  oppor- 
tunity in  the  amendment  of  the  Constitution,  they  have  not 
attempted  to  change  it  at  all. 

Mr.  Wagner. —  No. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  That  is  since  1846,  you  may  say,  there  has 
been  no  demand  upon  the  part  of  the  people  of  the  State  of  New 
York  for  an  increase  in  the  number  of  elected  State  officials, 
roughly  speaking. 

Mr.  Wagner. —  Yes. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  What  that  is  due  to,  is  anybody's  guess. 
I  rather  think  that  they  are  more  efficient. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Was  there  some  situation  at  the  time  in  respect 
to  the  Superintendent  of  Public  Works  which  bore  on  that  ? 


Doc.  ~No.  13  24 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  I  don't  know  how  the  Canal  Board  was 
organized.  As  I  remember,  there  were  a  great  many  elected 
officers  on  it,  and  there  had  developed  a  great  deal  of  scandal  in 
connection  with  the  management  of  the  canal.  The  result  of 
those  scandals  was  that  the  people  of  the  State  of  New  York  said, 
"  We  are  not  going  to  be  bothered  with  a  great  number  of  elected 
officers,  we  are  going  to  concentrate  upon  the  Governor,"  and  they 
provided  for  the  Superintendent  of  Public  Works.  And  the  same 
thing,  I  think,  as  to  the  Superintendent  of  Prisons.  I  am  not 
certain  whether  that  is  in  the  Constitution  or  is  dependent  upon 
this  State,  but  there  has  been  a  reaction  against  popular  elected 
State  officers  since  1846.  But  that  would  not  have  anything  to 
do  with  the  desirability  of  the  rearrangement  of  those  150  separate 
boards  and  organizations  that  we  find  at  the  present  time. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  It  is  true  that  there  has  been  a  constantly 
increasing  number  of  boards  and  commissions  arising  from  the 
action  of  the  Legislature. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  It  has  never  receded  any,  but  it  has  always 
increased. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Roughly  speaking,  I  should  say  that  is 
true. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  If  that  is  true,  and  a  clear  lino  of  demarcation 
is  made  between  those  various  departments,  so  that  there  is  this 
grouping  that  you  refer  to,  into  a  very  large  department,  would 
it  be  necessary  for  some  provision  to  be  inserted  in  the  Constitu- 
tion that  any  subsequent  board  or  body  created  by  the  Legislature 
will  have  to  fall  into  one  of  those  departments?  Otherwise  you 
will  have  the  same  situation  that  you  have  to-day. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  You  will  start  over  again  and  build  up  by 
accretion  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes.  In  some  States  that  has  been  carried 
even  farther.    That  is,  the  Constitutions  of  some  of  the  Stales 


25  Doc.  No.  13 

have  prohibited  the  Legislature  from  establishing  any  new  officer 
—  any  new  State  office. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  Isn't  that  pretty  drastic  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes.  I  don't  think  you  could  go  that  far. 
You  cannot  see  far  enough  ahead.  There  may  be  new  matter 
that  may  have  to  be  taken  into  the  State  administration,  and  I 
think  the  method  you  have  mentioned  would  be  the  method  that 
would  meet  the  particular  situation  that  you  find  here  in  New 
York. 

Mr.  Bockes. —  If  your  system  were  adopted,  do  you  think  the 
people  would  have  the  same  interest  in  coming  out  to  elections 
and  watching  the  party  in  power  that  they  have  now  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  I  think  they  would  have  more.  If  you 
should  concentrate  their  attention  on  a  very  few.  I  think  the 
trouble  now  with  the  ordinary  voter  is:  "I  don't  know  what  is 
going  to  be  the  influence  of  my  vote."  If  you  could  concentrate 
the  thing  on  the  Governor  I  think  you  would  get  a  greater  interest. 

Mr.  Bockes. —  Then  you  would  have  the  people  voting  in 
regard  to  their  choice  of  men  rather  than  upon  their  choice  as 
to  parties '?  That  is,  for  instance,  my  father  taught  me  that  it 
was  my  business  to  watch  the  party  in  power,  and  if  it  did  not 
do  its  duty  to  the  people,  help  to  put  it  out  and  send  the  other 
one  in.  I  could  not,  under  your  system,  teach  my  children  that 
same  system  of  government. 

Doctor  Goodnow.- —  How  would  you  do  with  regard  to  the 
President  of  the  United  States?  Is  there  not  more  interest  with 
regard  to  the  President  of  the  United  States  ?  Now  we  concen- 
trate our  attention  on  him.  Doesn't  he  mean  something  more  to 
us  than  the  Governor  does  in  the  State  of  New  York  ? 

Mr.  Bockes. —  Not  as  a  person,  but  as  the  representative  of  a 
party. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  That  is  exactly  what  I  mean.  You  do 
not  diminish  the  influence  of  party;  it  will,  rather,  increase  the 
influence  of  party  by  having  the  members  of  the  party  and  the 


Doc.  No.  13  26 

Mr.  Bockes. —  That  is  true  where  he  is  subject  to  a  party  con- 
vention control,  but  in  this  State  we  have  done  away  with  con- 
ventions, so  that  our  Governor  is  simply  a  man  and  has  not  even 
the  advice  of  a  party  any  more. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  He  will  have  it  pretty  soon.  I  do  not 
believe  that  you  have  done  away  with  parties  at  all. 

Mr.  Bannister. —  Doctor  Goodnow,  how  many  choices  are  ever 
given  to  the  English  elector?  Isn't  he  practically  confined  to 
voting  for  one  or  two  men? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  The  only  choice  that  any  particular  elector 
has  at  any  parliamentary  election  is  to  vote  for  one,  unless  he  — 

Mr.  Stimson. —  He  sometimes  has  votes,  in  two  or  three  locali- 
ties? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Bannister. —  Is  there  any  doubt  that  the  government  of 
England  is  more  democratic  than  our  own  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  It  is  more  responsive  of  their  opinion  than 
our  own. 

Mr.  Bannister. —  That  is  what  I  mean  by  democratic  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Bannister. —  If  the  electors  of  England  want  anything 
can't  they  get  it  quicker  than  we  can  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes ;  I  think  they  do  ordinarily. 

Mr.  Bockes. —  One  more  question  I  want  to  ask  with  regard 
to  the  first  part  of  your  remarks.  Are  there  any  states  in  the 
Union  now  where  the  executive,  or  appointees  of  the  executive  or 
Board  of  Estimate  originates  bills  for  raising  revenue,  and  still 
retain  in  the  executive  the  power  of  veto  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Well,  my  remarks  were  confined  more  to 
the  estimates  of  expenditures  than  to  revenue,  but  in  a  number  of 
states  there  is  provision  made  for  this  sending  out  of  the  estimates 
by  the  Governor.  The  only  trouble  with  the  method  as  worked 
out  in  actual  practice,  is  that  inasmuch  as  the  Governor  is  not 


27  Doc.  No.  13 

provided  with  a  force  to  help  him,  his  duty  of  sending  in  the  esti- 
mate is  very  perfunctorily  performed.  That  is,  he  simply  gets 
the  estimates  from  the  different  administrative  officers  and  passes 
them  along,  and  he  does  in  those  states  have  a  veto  power. 

Mr.  Bockes. —  The  Legislature  is  not  under  constitutional  re- 
striction from  raising  his  estimate  if  it  wants  to  in  any  particular? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  No ;  I  don't  know  of  any  State  in  the 
Union  where  that  is  the  case.  But  that  is  quite  common  in  the 
cities  of  this  country. 

M  r.  Bockes. —  It  has  been  so,  yes. 

Mt.  Wagner. —  If  we  wanted  to  make  our  system  analogous 
to  the  English  system  we  would  give  that  power  of  inquiry  into 
requests  for  appropriations  to  our  State  Comptroller,  wouldn't  we? 

Doctor  Goodnow. — •  You  mean  the  power  of  supervision  over 
the  estimates  ? 

Mr.  Wagner. —  Yes ;  the  power  of  supervision  over  the  esti- 
mates before  the  estimates  are  transmitted  to  the  Legislature. 
The  power  of  making  a  thorough  investigation  as  to  their  needs 
and  requirements. 

Doctor  Goodxow. —  He  might  be  made  use  of  by  the  Governor, 
but  I  think  it  would  be  unfortunate  not  to  concentrate  that  power 
in  the  Governor  because  the  Governor  is  the  man;  more  than  any- 
one else,  who  is  in  the  public  eye.  He  is  more  responsible,  feels 
a  greater  sense  of  responsibility,  I  think,  and  the  people  regard 
him  as  more  responsible  than  any  other  officer  in  the  government. 

Mr.  Wagner. —  My  mind  is  open  on  the  point,  but  this  sug- 
gestion came  to  me,  I  thought  by  that  we  perhaps  would  have  the 
advantage  of  having  really  two  investigations. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  I  think  there  is  a  great  advantage.  I 
think  that  is  what  is  done  in  Russia  at  the  present  time.  That  is, 
the  Board  of  Audit  works  on  the  estimates  before  they  come  be- 
fore the  Legislature.  I  was  talking  with  a  Russian  about  it  and 
he  said  it  was  a  very  great  advantage,  because  by  auditing  the 
accounts  they  get  all  that  familiarity  with  the  departments,  with 


Doc.  No.  13  28 

any  practice  that  were  to  be  deprecated  in  the  departments,  and 
they  called  the  attention  of  the  persons  who  drew  up  the  estimates 
to  those  practices  and  had  them  corrected.  He  thought  it  was  a 
very  valuable  thing,  and  that  would  be  in  line  with  your  sug- 
gestion. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  That  is  done  in  our  cities  now.  The  Comp- 
troller of  the  city,  who  is  the  auditing  officer  of  the  city,  has  the 
same  power  and  is  used,  I  know,  in  making  up  the  budget  for  New 
York  City,  in  preparing  the  estimates. 

Mr.  Wagnee. —  They  have  a  standing  committee,  haven't  they, 
in  the  Board  of  Estimate,  &  budget  committee,  haven't  they? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  They  have  in  the  City  of  New  York,  for  in- 
stance, a  series  of  expert  ^accountants,  under  the  Mayor,  known  as 
the  Commissioners  of  Accounts,  and  then  in  addition  to  them  they 
use  also  the  subordinates  in  the  Comptroller's  office. 

Mr.  Wagnee.—  I  do  not  think  the  Commissioner  of  Accounts 
has  anything  to  do  with  the  making  up  of  the  appropriations. 

Mr.  Stimson. — ■  I  understood  from  Mr.  Prendergast  that  they 
assisted  the  Mayor  in  it. 

Mr.  Wagner. —  I  thought  they  had  created  a  special  budget 
committee  in  the  Board  of  Estimate. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  There  is  a  budget  committee  and  there  is 
a  regular  force  of  engineers,  accountants,  etc. 

Mr.  Wagnee. —  That  is  under  that  committee,  isn't  it  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Wagnee. —  Under  that  budget  committee,  that  is  what  I 
mean  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Do  you  see  any  objection  to  their  having  help 
in  the  shape  of  experts'  help  to  assist  wherever  authorities  actually 
get  up  the  budget? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Thev  oua'ht  to  have  it. 


29  Doc.  No.  13 

Mr.  Stimson. —  They  ought  to  have  it  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow.—  They  ought  to  have  experts'  help. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  In  other  words,  the  people  upon  whom  you 
would  impose  the  responsibility  of  revising  the  estimate  ought  to 
be  given  the  expert  help  necessary  to  assist  them  to  do  it  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes.  I  don't  think  an  administrative 
supervision  without  that  would  be  effective. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  Relative  to  the  power  of  the  Governor  to  veto 
an  item  in  an  appropriation  bill,  what  should  be  his  power  as  to 
reducing  an  item  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  I  think  you  are  getting  at  it  in  the  wrong 
way,  putting  the  cart  before  the  horse.  That  is,  if  the  Governor 
had  the  administrative  supervision  of  estimates  then  if  the  Legis- 
lature would  do  what  the  House  of  Commons  has  done,  or  if  the 
Constitutional  Convention  would  do  it  for  them,  that  is,  prevent 
them  from  increasing  these  estimates,  then  there  would  not  be  any 
necessity  for  any  veto  of  items,  would  there? 

Mr.  Tanner. —  Suppose  the  Governor  makes  his  budget  and 
the  Legislature  adopts  that,  he  sees  there  that  a  mistake  has  been 
made,  he  has  no  power  to  do  anything  about  it  unless  he  can  reduce 
an  item  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  As  I  understand  it  an  appropriation  is 
seldom  regarded  as  mandatory.  An  appropriation  is  rather  a 
recommendation. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  When  did  a  department  send  back  any  amount 
of  money  that  had  been  appropriated  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Quite  a  number  of  them  have. 

Mr.  Wagner. —  There  are  many  of  them. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Many  departments  do  it  every  year. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  Is  that  in  any  considerable  amount,  Senator  ? 

Mr.  Wagner. —  Yes.  Our  reappropriations  this  year  amounted 
to  nearly  two  millions  of  dollars  and  they  have  lasted  two  years 
and  have  not  been  spent  in  two  years  because  the  appropriation 
is  not  needed  until  a  lapse  of  two  years. 


Doc.  No.  13  30 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Of  course,  you  are  right,  Mr.  Tanner,  that 
if  you  keep  this  system  that  you  now  have  it  would  be  a  desirable 
thing  for  the  Governor  to  have  the  power  not  only  to  cut  out  an 
item  but  to  reduce  it  if  he  saw  fit. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  I  think  so.  I  was  just  asking  if  the  power  were 
carried  further  if  there  would  still  not  be  some  advantage  in  his 
having  the  right  to  reduce.  I  do  not  see  wha.t  harm  it  could  do, 
and  it  might  do  some  good. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  'Stimson. —  There  would  be  no  assumption  that  the  power 
would  always  remain  as  now. 

Doctor  Goodnow. — ■  No. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  And  that  is  the  system  you  characterize  as  the 
cart  before  the  horse? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Isn't  it  a  little  worse  than  that  ?  Doesn't  that 
system  amount  to  turning  over  to  the  Governor  the  real  legislative 
power  of  the  State  in  the  control  of  the  purse  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Of  course,  it  is  totally  contrary  to  the 
historical  development  of  the  English  idea  with  regard  to  it.  The 
English  idea  was  not  so  much  that  the  Legislature  or  House  of 
Commons  was  opposed  to  it,  but  it  was  to  prevent  the  King  from 
spending  too  much. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  In  other  words,  the  centuries-long  fight  for  the 
control  of  the  purse  was  in  order  that  the  people's  representatives 
in  the  Legislature  should  have  the  say  of  how  much  money  should 
be  spent. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Stimson.— And  this  system  which  we  arc  drifting  into, 
is  that  the  Legislature  pass  appropriations  which  we  know  arc 
too  large  and  let  the  Governor  cut  them  down  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 


31  Doc.  No.  13 

Mr.  Stimson. —  That  is  giving  the  power  of  the  purse,  isn't  it? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  That  is  what  it  is. 

Mr.  Wagnek. —  What  did  you  say  about  the  election  of  the 
Governor  of  a  state  as  an  'administrative  officer,  and  being  the 
sole  administrative  of  the  state?  Did  I  understand  you  to  make 
a  remark  of  that  kind  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  No ;  nothing  except  the  expression  of  a 
wish.     I  did  not  characterize  the  present  system  in  that  way. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  Well,  I  thought  that  you  expressed  yourself 
as  favoring  what  is  known  as  the  short  ballot  system  in  connection 
with  the  reforms  that  you  believe  are  urgent  here  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  I  would.  That  is,  I  do  not  see  why  the 
State  of  New  York  should  not  just  do  'about  what  the  Federal 
government  does.  All  we  elect  there  is  a  President,  and  we  con- 
centrate our  attention  on  the  President  and  hold  the  President 
responsible. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  Do  you  think  we  hold  the  President  respon- 
sible, or  the  party  he  represents? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Well,  it  is  the  same  thing,  isn't  it  ? 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  Oh,  no ;  we  trust  the  people  to  elect  the  Gov- 
ernor then. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Oullinan. —  Why  cannot  they  be  trusted  to  elect  the  other 
officers  of  the  State  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Well,  it  is  a  question  that  seems  to  me  not 
so  much  trusting  the  people,  but  it  is  a  question  of  how  it  works 
in  practice.  Is  'any  State  government  in  this  country  as  efficient 
as  the  United  States  government? 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  Well,  I  am  not  prepared  to  .answer  that. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Isn't  it  true  that  at  the  present  time  the 
people  of  the  United  States  feel  much  more  respect  for  the  United 


Doc.  No.   13  32 

States  government  for  what  it  does  than  they  do  for  what  ether 
single  State  governments  do  in  this  country? 

Mr.  Hale. —  Except  Vermont. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Vermont  has  400,000  inhabitants. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  Doctor,  the  United  States  government  is  com- 
posed of  a  series  of  states,  the  composition  of  the  government  is  of 
such  a  character  that  it  is  impossible  for  them  to  vote  for  the 
members  of  the  Cabinet,  you  might  say,  who  correspond  to  our 
elective  State  officers. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  But  supposing  it  is,  isn't  it  true  that  at 
the  present  time  every  American  citizen  knows  that  when  the 
United  States  government  does  a  thing  it  is  going  to  do  it  better 
than  the  State  government  ? 

Mr.  Wagner. —  I  don't  think  so. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  In  some  respects  I  admit  that. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  I  don't  know  of  any  case  at  the  present 
time  where  the  people  do  not  feel  more  satisfaction,  more  confi- 
dence that  the  thing  will  be  done  well,  if  it  is  done  by  the  United 
States  government  than  if  it  is  done  by  the  State. 

Mr.  Pelletreau. —  And  for  less  money. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  And  for  less  money,  and  it  is  simply  be- 
cause you  have  so  scattered  the  State  government,  the  State  gov- 
ernment is  so  unconcentrated  at  the  present  time  that  hardly 
anyone  can  vote  intelligently  with  regard  to  State  officers. 

Mr.  Wagner. —  Do  you  mean  at  this  particular  moment  com- 
paring the  Federal  government  with  the  State  of  New  York  ? 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  Do  you  think  it  is  a  good  thing  in  a  repre- 
sentative form  of  government  for  the  people  to  be  deprived  of  the 
opportunity  of  considering  the  capacity  of  their  officers  during 
an  election  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  I  do.  I  do  not  think  that  the  people  are 
competent  to  express  a  judgment  on  so  many  people  at  the  presenl 
time.     I  know  perfectly  well,  I  flatter  myself  that  I  am  a  reason- 


33  Doc.  No.  13 

able  man,  a  reasonably  intelligent  voter,  but  I  know  when  I  go 
to  vote  that  I  don't  know  10  per  cent,  of  the  people,  don't  know 
anything  about  who  they  are,  what  they  have  done,  who  are  on 
the  ballot  that  I  am  to  vote  for. 

Mr.  Cuixinan. —  Do  you  think  you  are  doing  your  duty  as  a 
citizen  when  you  do  not  inform  yourself  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  I  cannot  inform  myself.  I  don't  know  how 
to  and  there  are  not  10  per  cent,  of  the  citizens  who  do,  and  what 
we  do,  of  course,  is  to  rely^  so  far  as  we  can,  upon  the  party 
organization.  We  say,  on  the  whole  we  think  the  Democratic 
organization  is  better  than  the  Republican,  or  the  Democratic 
party  is  worse  than  the  Republican,  and  we  let  it  go  >at  that,  and 
in  a  great  many  instances,  we  take  what  happens,  where  there  is 
unfortunately  an  attempt  made  by  a  voter  to  discriminate  apart 
from  the  party,  and  to  vote  for  persons,  then  you  get  a  lot  of 
discordant  people  into  the  government,  the  Governor  may  be  a 
Republican,  the  'Comptroller  a  Democrat  and  so,  and  then'  what 
do  you  do  ?  You  simply  have  paralysis  of  the  State  government. 
Nothing  is  done  during  that  period.  I  do  not  think  that  that  is 
common  sense,  and  we  certainly  do  not  have  it  when  we  come 
down  to  the  Federal  government.  There  we  know  that  the  ad- 
ministration is  either  Democratic  or  Republican  and  we  hold 
them  responsible  for  it,  and  we  cannot  do  that  in  the  State 
government. 

Take,  for  example,  here  is  ia  State  government,  we  have  an 
Attorney-General  who  is  elective.  One  of  the  things  that  have 
happened  a  number  of  times  in  the  history  of  the  State  is  that  we 
have  had  a  Governor  of  one  party  and  an  Attorney-General  of 
the  other,  and  the  Governor  would  not  trust  the  Attorney-General 
to  counsel  him,  and  the  Legislature  has  been  compelled  to  provide 
a  personal  counsel  who  can  be  appointed  and  who  will  be  in 
sympathy  with  his  political  view. 

Mr.  Bockes. —  Suppose  the  Attorney-General  is  appointed  by 
the  Governor,  he  to  advise  all  the  officers  of  the  State,  suppose  he 
has  to  write  an  opinion  which  will  not  satisfy  either  the  officers 
of  the  State,  the  same  as  the  corporation  counsel  of  New  York, 
he  is  supposed  to  be  the  adviser  of  the  comptroller,  but  he  is  ap- 


Doc.  No.  13  34 

pointed  by  the  major,  and  what  happens  to  him  if  the  opinions 
which  he  should  write  should  offend  the  mayor  and  be  in  favor  of 
the  comptroller  ?  Does  not  the  same  thing  apply  to  the  Attorney- 
General  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  That  is  an  argument  for  not  electing  the 
comptroller  and  mayor  at  the  same  time. 

Mr.  Bockes. —  Isn't  it  an  argument  to  elect  your  corporation 
counsel  or  have  him  appointed  by  all  those  parties  — 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Then  it  seems  to  me  you  would  have  it 
worse  still. 

Mr.  Bockes. —  Isn't  he  supposed  to  advise  the  Legislature,  and 
advise  even  the  county  officers  in  case  he  is  asked  for  an  opinion  ? 
In  that  instance,  if  his  advice  should  not  satisfy  the  Governor, 
and  he  was  the  Governor's  appointee,  why,  how  long  would  he 
remain  Attorney-General,  do  you  suppose  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Well,  the  Governor  is  the  more  important 
person,  isn't  he  ? 

Mr.  Bockes. —  But'  he  ought  to  be  in  such  position  that  he 
could  advise  fearlessly  and  honestly  everybody  in  the  State. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  We  do  not  think  that  is  necessary  in  the 
Federal  government.  The  Attorney-General  there  is  appointed 
by  the  President;  he  is  removable  at  will,  and  there  is  never  any 
difficulty  which  has  developed,  and  Congress  has  not  had  to  provide 
the  President  with  a  personal  counsel,  as  has  had  to  be  done  here 
in  the  case  of  the  Governor. 

Mr.  'Stimson. —  How  about  the  Solicitor  of  the  Treasury  ?  I 
think  he  exercises  a  power  very  unlimited  in  the  Federal  govern- 
ment. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  You  mean  the  Comptroller  of  the 
Treasury  ? 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Yes.  He  can  stop  the  payment  of  money  by 
any  cabinet  officer,  by  the  President  himself,  can't  he  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Has  he  ever  been  removed  ? 


35  Doc.  No.  13 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Not  that  I  know  of.  I  think  the  last  man, 
Treadwell,  has  been  in  there  about  fifteen  years. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  I  think  I  noticed  bj  the  paper  yesterday  that 
he  had  stopped  the  payment  of  some  military  expenses,  without 
3>eing  removed. 

Mr.  Hale. —  Is  that  legal  or  moral  power  that  he  has  gathered 
to  himself  by  being  worthy  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  The  Attorney-General. 

Mr.  Hale. —  In  other  words,  when  he  does  a  thing  as  radical 
as  that  he  is  holding  there  a  superior  office,  isn't  he? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  They  have  gradually  got  the  idea  down 
there  that  the  Comptroller  of  the  Treasury  ought  to  be  about  as 
independent  as  a  judge. 

Mr.  Hale. —  Without  any  restraint  ?  Like  a  Member  of  Par- 
liament? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  They  play  the  game  that  way. 

Mr.  Nicoll. —  Have  you  considered  the  relative  expense  of  the 
United  States  government,  the  administration  of  the  government 
of  the  United  States  as  compared  with  the  State  government  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  I  never  went  into  that. 

Mr.  Nicoll. —  What  is  your  impression  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  My  impression  is  they  do  work  much  more 
Cheaply  in  the  United  States  government  than  they  do  in  the 
States. 

Mr.  Hale. —  States  generally,  or  in  the  State  of  New  York  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow.- —  I  don't  know  about  the  States  personally, 
but  I  think  in  the  State  of  New  York. 

Mr.  Austin. —  I  do  not  think  you  are  correct  when  you  inti- 
mate that  the  reason  for  creating  the  office  of  counsel  for  Gov- 
ernor was  friction  between  the  Attorney-General  and  Governor. 
The  duties  of  the  counsel  to  the  Governor  are  entirely  distinct 
and  separate  and  different  from  the  offices  that  have  been,  from 


Doc.  No.   13  36 

time  immemorial,  filled  by  the  Attorney-General,  and  his  opinions 
have  been  confined  to  advice  to  the  Governor  on  matters  of  legis- 
lation, where  the  Governor  needed  an  adviser  through  his  inability 
to  go  into  detail. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  I  think  if  you  will  go  to  Washington  you 
will  find  that  the  Attorney-General  does  that  work.  There  has 
been  no  necessity  under  the  United  States  Federal  organizations 
for  it. 

Mr.  Hale. —  He  is  the  personal  appointee  of  the  Governor. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  But  you  have  had  to  have  the  officer  here 
because  the  Attorney-General  was  not  the  personal  appointee  of 
the  Governor. 

Mr.  Austin. —  No ;  I  don't  think  so. 

Mr.  Wagner. —  A  deputy  could  easily  enough  be  assigned,  but 
I  have  forgotten  which  Governor  began  the  practice,  but  it  was 
desired  to  have  the  place  in  the  executive  department. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  That  often  is  a  reason. 

Mr.  Beach. —  Doctor  Goodnow,  to  go  back  to  the  budget  under 
discussion,  what  would  be  the  practice  in  case  the  budget  is 
actually  passed  and  was  not  sufficient  for  some  particular  depart- 
ment, in  actual  practice  for  the  current  uses  and  expenses  ? 
Would  it  be  the  idea  that  each  department  must  be  actually  held 
down  for  that  current  year  to  the  expenditure  of  that  amount  of 
money,  apportioned  to  it  in  the  appropriation  bill?  Or  would 
we  be  confronted  with  a  supply  bill  every  year,  as  we  are  now, 
to  make  up  the  deficiencies  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  That,  of  course,  would  all  depend  upon  the 
way  in  which  the  system  is  administered,  and  would  depend  apoaa 
the  conditions  of  any  particular  year.  You  can  foresee  to  a  cer- 
tain extent,  but  you  cannot  foresee  absolutely.  This  building 
burned  one  year.  You  might  have  to  have  a  supplementary 
estimate  come  in  for  that,  and  deficiency  bills.  You  might  have 
them,  but  I  don't  think  you  would  have  as  many  as  you  have  at 
the  present  time. 


37  Doc.  No.  13 

Mr.  Wagner. —  It  would  tend  to  have  the  different  departments 
apportion  more  nearly  what  they  actually  now  get.  In  other 
words,  it  seems  to  be  the  practice  of  the  Legislature  to  arbitrarily 
cut  down  the  appropriations  way  below,  apparently,  what  is  neces- 
sary and  then  immediately  make  it  good  with  a  deficiency  bill. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  I  think  what  Mr.  Beach  is  referring  to  there 
has  happened,  according  to  my  recollection  of  the  evidence,  rather 
more  commonly  from  an  attempt  to  make  an  apparent  or  false 
economy  on  the  part  of  the  estimates.  I  mean  that,  there  being 
no  budget  responsibility,  it  has  appeared  that  it  has  become  a 
practice  very  often  to  make  the  regular  appropriation  bills  smaller 
than  they  needed  and  then  cover  it  with  a  supply  bill.  That  has 
been  stated,  with  bow  much  accuracy  I  don't  know. 

Mr.  Deyo. —  Doctor,  that,  as  Mr.  Stimson  has  intimated,  the 
fight  under  the  English  system  of  government  for  100  years  was 
as  to  the  question  of  who  should  pull  the  purse  strings.  That 
fight  was  transferred  to  the  colonies  here,  and  when  this  govern- 
ment was  established  it  was  a  departure,  to  some  extent,  from 
the  English  system,  in  that  we  vested  in  our  Legislatures  the 
absolute  control  of  the  purse  strings.  In  that  respect  it  differed 
from  the  English  system  —  the  principle  was  different.  We 
have  always  adhered  to  that,  I  think,  in  all  of  the  States  and  also 
in  the  Federal  government.  What  would  you  say  to  this  propo- 
sition, that  this  suggestion  of  permitting  a  budget-making  body  to 
consist  of  the  Governor  and  some  of  the  officials,  whether  elected 
or  appointed,  it  is  immaterial  which,  but  to  allow  the  executive 
or  the  administrative  branch  of  the  government  to  make  up  a 
budget  for  the  legislative  branch,  and  then  prohibit  the  legislative 
branch  of  the  government  from  increasing  those  appropriations? 
In  other  words,  aren't  you  departing  from  a  fundamental  principle 
in  our  theory  of  government  in  loosening  up  the  hold  of  the 
Legislature  upon  the  purse  strings  and  transferring  that  to  the 
executive  or  administrative  branch  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Well,  it  does  not  seem  to  me  that  there  is 
anything  inconsistent  with  democratic  government.  That  is,  if 
you  consider  the  control  of  the  purse  strings  consists  mainly  in 
the  facility  of  pulling  them  open,  why  then,  of  course,  that  would 


Doc.  No.  13  38 

be  inconsistent  with  the  idea  of  the  control  of  the  purse  strings; 
but  I  doubt  very  much  whether  there  is  any  fundamental  principle 
in  democratic  government,  as  we  see  it  in  this  country,  which 
must  necessarily  involve  extravagance.  That  is  what  seems  to 
me  that  your  argument  leads  to.  That  is,  we  must  let  the  Legis- 
lature have  this  control  in  order  that  they  may  open  the  purse 
strings,  not  that  they  may  close  them.  The  theory  of  the  old  days 
was  to  close  the  purse.  That  is  what  the  people  wanted  to  do, 
and  here  this  simply  encourages  extravagance.  It  does  not  seem 
to  me  that  that  is  a  necessary  fundamental  characteristic  of 
popular  government. 

Mr.  Deyo. —  Under  our  present  system,  the  Legislature  has  the 
right  to  open  our  purse  strings,  and  the  executive  branch  has  the 
right  to  close  them. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Deyo. —  Doesn't  this  suggestion  involve  a  transposition  of 
those  functions  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Certainly,  a  transposition  of  the  functions. 

Mr.  Deyo. —  It  gives  the  executive  branch  the  right  to  open  and 
the  legislative  the  power  to  close  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow.—  It  is  a  transposition  of  the  functions  as 
they  are  distributed  at  the  present,  but  historically,  of  course,  as 
Mr.  Stimson  has  pointed  out,  that  was  not  the  original  idea. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Wasn't  the  first  change  from  the  old  order 
made  when  we  gradually  allowed  the  first  closing  of  the  purse  to 
be  transferred  to  the  Governor  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. — •  Yes. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  And  wasn't  that  a  complete  reversion  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Of  the  theory  of  the  fathers  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Stimson.—  In  that  it  conveyed  to  our  Governor  the  real 
power  over  the  purse  strings  ? 


39  Doc.  No.  13 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  And  that  is  only  common  of  the  grant  to 
the  government,  the  veto  power  on  an  item  in  the  appropriation 
bill. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Precisely,  it  has  come  as  an  outcome  of  the 
extravagance  of  which  you  speak  ? 

Mr.  Tannee. — Substantially,  isn't  the  budget  system  which 
you  now  advocate  merely  a  veto  in  advance  ?  The  Governor  fixes 
a  figure  beyond  which  the  appropriation  cannot  go  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  Does  it  at  the  beginning  of  the  term  instead  of 
the  end  of  the  term  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  Supposing  the  Legislature,  which  has  the 
duty  on  it  of  imposing  the  tax  to  raise  the  funds  of  the  State,  sup- 
posing they  say,  we  won't  raise  any  funds,  what  is  going  to  be  the 
outcome  of  that  situation?  Aren't  you  putting  the  cart  before 
the  horse  when  you  say  you  want  an  independent  body  to  say  how 
much  money  shall  be  raised  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. — ■  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  action  of  the 
Legislature  is  not  necessary  in  the  present  time  for  the  raising  of 
most  of  the  funds  of  the  State.  That  is,  most  of  the  taxes  of  the 
State  at  the  present  time,  out  of  which  State  expenditures  are 
defrayed,  are  fixed  by  permanent  law.  That  is,  the  Corporation 
Tax  Law,  Inheritance  Tax  Law,  and  Liquor  Tax  and  a  series  of 
other  laws,  and  it  is  only  recently  that  we  have  come  back  to  a 
direct  tax  which  makes  it  necessary  for  the  Legislature  to  act 
in  any  one  particular  year.  We  went  on  for  years  here  without 
the  necessity  of  any  action  on  the  part  of  the  Legislature  for  the 
purpose  of  bringing  the  revenues  in. 

Mr.  Culeinan. —  But  the  Legislature  represents  the  people, 
and  they  have  passed  those  laws,  and  now  you  are  going  to  say 
to  the  Legislature  that  all  those  who  raised  those  revenues  cannot 
have  anything  to  say  about  the  appropriations  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes ;  you  can  cut  down  appropriations  that 
are  proposed,  but,  in  order  to  prevent  this  log  rolling  that  has  been 


Doc.  No.  13  40 

going  on,  and  which  is  increasing  at  an  alarming  rate,  the  expendi- 
tures of  every  State  in  the  Union  doing  the  same  thing,  they 
are  doing  it  in  the  Federal  government,  a  practice  which  is  not 
practiced  in  any  other  government,  we  are  going  to  say,  you  cannot 
raise  those  appropriations. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  Do  you  consider  they  have  log  rolling  in 
Washington  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Certainly.     Pork  barrels  and  all  others. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  But  in  Washington  they  have  not  this  system 
that  you  propose  of  preventing  the  estimate  from  being  raised  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  No.  And  historically  here  is  what  the 
House  of  Commons,  from  which  every  Legislature  has  sprung, 
found  as  a  result  of  its  experience,  it  had  to  do,  and  did  it  two 
hundred  years  ago. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  Is  not  the  budget  system  in  England  the 
result  of  the  fact  that  the  men  in  the  House  of  Lords  owned 
England  at  that  time,  and  have  continued  to  own  it  since  so  far  as 
real  estate  is  concerned  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  I  do  not  see  how  that  could  affect  this. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  The  money  has  to  be  raised  by  taxes. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  But  as  a  general  thing  where  the  owners 
of  the  land  —  the  land  owners  — controlled  the  government,  you 
find  they  do  not  let  the  taxes  go  on  the  land,  and  they  have  not  let 
the  taxes  go  on  the  land  anything  like  what  you  have  here.  They 
put  them  on  indirect  taxes  there  until  recently. 

Mr.  Hale. —  The  large  estates  are  being  broken  up  there? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  That  is  just  lately. 

Mr.  Austin. —  Just  as  a  matter  of  information,  and  not  as  a 
matter  of  importance  hero,  in  England,  is  a  direct  t:ix  levied  the 
same  as  we  have  it  here?    Do  they  have  a  direct  tax  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  On  the  land  ? 

Mr.  Austin. —  Yes. 


41  Doc.  No.  13 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Practically,  no.  They  have  a  tax  on  the 
rentable  value.    If  a  house  is  not  rented  they  do  not  pay  taxes. 

Mr.  S'timson. —  Their  main  tax  is  on  incomes  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Lennox. —  Doesn't  the  extravagance  in  this  State  come 
from  the  administrative  department  rather  than  from  the  legisla- 
tive department?  The  extravagance  that  has  grown  up,  hasn't 
that  come  from  administrative  department,  and  hasn't  the  Legis- 
lature done  its  best  by  cutting  down  estimates  asked  for  by  the 
administrative  department  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  I  don't  know.  I  have  not  been  up  here 
and  I  cannot  speak  from  actual  experience. 

Mr.  Tanner. — ■  The  same  Legislature  has  kept  on  increasing 
the  number  of  departments. 

Mr.  Lennox. —  You  do  not  want  to  take  the  right  away  from 
the  Legislature  to  create  a  department  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  All  the  legislators  like  to  have  a  little  State 
money  spent  in  their  district. 

Mr.  Lennox. —  The  main  extravagance  is  in  the  different  de- 
partments of  the  State  made  up  by  the  ^administrators  of  those 
departments,  and  so  really  the  check  on  extravagance  now  rests  in 
the  Legislature.     They  exert  it  to  a  large  extent. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  T  should  say,  from  your  description  of  the 
case,  that  one  would  have  to  come  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
legislative  efforts  have  been  ineffective  and  what  you  want  is 
something  that  will  be  more  effective. 

Mr.  Lennox. —  Yes. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  This  has  been  adopted,  as  I  say,  in  England 
and  in  every  English  speaking  country  except  our  own.  They 
spend  a  good  deal  of  money,  of  course,  but  I  think  it  is  more 
effective. 

Mr,  Lennox. —  Don't  you  think  a  budget  made  up  by  adminis- 
trative officers  would  be  less  or  smaller  or  more  economical  than 
the  budget  made  up  by  the  Legislature? 


Doc.  No.   13  42 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  I  think  so. 

Mr.  Lennox. —  That  is  not  true  because  the  budgets  put  in  now 
by  different  administrative  officers  are  large? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  But  you  have  no  check  upon  the  part  of 
the  Governor  or  no  check  by  any  central  body. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  At  the  present  we  have  no  budget  body. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  No. 

Mr.    Stimson. —  We  have   a   series  of  estimates   made   up   by 

subordinates  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Lennox. —  That  has  to  be  made  up  by  subordinates.  Mr. 
Prendergast  told  me  that  theirs  are  made  up  by  subordinates  ot 
large  experience. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  But  Comptroller  Prendergast  told  us  at  the 
same  time  that  that  same  budget  had  been  cut  down  $6,000,000 
a  year  by  their  central  Board  of  Estimate. 

Mr.  Lennox. —  And  further  cut  down  by  the  Common  Council. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  And  further  cut  down  by  the  Common  Council. 
As  I  remember  the  figures  the  average  cutting  down  by  the  central 
executive  heads  the  lowest  was  $6,000,000  and  it  ran  from  that  up 
to  nearly  $12,000,000,  while  the  Board  of  Aldermen  cut  it  down 
about  $700,000  or  $800,000,  the  figures  we  had  for  the  last  year. 

Mr.  Rhees. —  This  does  not  prevent  the  Legislature  from  re- 
ducing ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  Not  a  bit.  It  only  prevents  them  from 
increasing. 

Mr.  Austin. —  Here  was  a  suggestion  made  by  Congressman 
Fitzgerald  before  the  Committee;  he  favored  the  budget  idea. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  He  was  opposed  to  it  at  one  time. 

Mr.  Austin. —  He  said  in  his  judgment  you  should  not  go  so 
far  as  to  absolutely  take  away  from  the  Legislature  the  right  to 


43  Doc.  No.   13 

increase  a  budget  item,  but  bis  idea  was  that  you  should  make  it 
so  difficult  to  increase,  by  requiring'  say  a  three-quarters  vote  of 
the  Legislature,  or  something  of  that  sort  that  it  would  only  be  in 
eases  of  extraordinary  necessity,  where  there  was  a  popular  de- 
mand for  it,  and  in  deprecation  of  the  Governor's  attitude  that 
that  would  occur. 

Doctor  Gooonow. —  Look  at  the  history  of  the  thing. 

Mr.  Austin. —  I  am  simply  asking  you  what  your  idea  is,  be- 
cause he  was  a  big  man. 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  According  to  the  rules  of  the  House  of 
Representatives  in  Washington,  no  order  is  in  order  which  pro- 
vides for  legislation  that  would  increase  expenditures.  In  the 
case  of  an  appropriation  bill,  what  do  they  do?  They  will  sus- 
pend the  rules  by  unanimous  vote,  when  the  thing  gets  up  before 
the  House  of  Representatives. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  In  other  words,  they  even  now  have  one  of 
their  rules  which  would  do  this  very  thing,  but  nullify  that  rule 
by  unanimous  consent? 

Mr.  Austin. —  That  is  different  from  providing  by  constitu- 
tional provision  that  it  could  not  be  increased  except  by  a  three- 
quarter  vote,  because  they  could  not  suspend  the  rules  of  the 
Constitution  ? 

Doctor  Goodnow. —  No. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  I  was  asking  Senator  Wagner  the  other  day 
what  the  effect  had  been  of  the  provision  which  is  in  the  Consti- 
tution now,  which  forbids  any  local  or  private  legislation  except 
by  two-thirds  vote.     Is  that  an  effective  check  now  ? 

Mr.  Wagner. —  No,  sir.  It  has  not  any  great  effect  upon  the 
size  of  our  budget. 

Mr.  Deyo. —  Are  measures  defeated  on  that  ground  ? 

Mr.  Wagner. —  I  cannot  recall  of  any. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Or  is  it  possible  for  members  to  obtain  two- 
thirds  vote  for  their  particular  measure  by  courtesy,  irrespective 
of  party  lines  ? 


Doc.   No.   1%  44 

Mr.  Wagner. —  I  would  not  say  courtesy,  but  merit. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  I  will  put  my  question  in  another  way:  Is  it 
commonly  possible  for  members  to  obtain  a  two-thirds  vote  of  the 
House  for  a  local  or  private  bill  which  they  desire  regardless  of 
party  lines  ? 

Mr.  Wagner. —  I  do  not  think  they  experience  any  great  diffi- 
culty, because  the  Legislature  usually  relies  upon  the  representa- 
tive in  that  locality  as  to  the  merits  of  the  particular  proposition. 
There  are  not  very  many  of  those. 

Air.  Stimson.- — Yes,  I  understand,  but  your  experience  in  the 
Legislature,  so  far  as  it  goes,  would  rather  indicate  that  such  a 
provision  for  a  two-thirds  vote  does  not  prevent  members  from 
getting  bills  passed  by  a  two-thirds  vote  for  a  local  purpose  when 
they  want  it? 

Mr.  Wagner. —  Not  for  a  local  purpose.  When  it  gets  to  ap- 
propriation bills  there  is  a  difference.  If  it  required  a  two-thirds 
vote  to  pass  the  bridge  bills  they  would  —  the  bridge  bills  that 
were  passed,  and  other  bills,  which,  while  they  are  not  really  local 
bills,  that  is,  State  branches,  and  for  an  alleged  State  purpose, 
you  could  mot  have  passed  any  of  them,  because  they  could  not 
secure  a  two-thirds  vote  for  very  many  of  them.  T  think  all  the 
members  of  my  party  were  recorded  against  every  one  of  them. 
And  those  are  the  class  of  bills  that  Doctor  Goodnow  is  talking 
about. 

Doctor  Goodnow. — I  should  think,  just  from  a  point  of  view 
of  political  expedience,  that  what  you  suggest  would  be  a  good 
first  step  to  take;  that  is,  provided  something  could  be  adopted. 
I  think  from  the  point  of  view  of  actual  practice  throughout  the 
world,  that  the  only  way  to  check  this  extravagance  is  by  adopting 
some  such  thing  as  this  House  of  Commons  Rule,  1713.  but 
whether  the  people  of  the  State  would  be  ready  for  it  is  another 
proposition,  and  they  might  be  willing  to  accept  such  a  proposal 
as  you  make. 

Mr.  Austin. —  That  is  the  idea  I  had  in  mind.  Of  course  there 
is  opposition,  as  well  as  there  are  a  great  many  people  who  favor 
it.  Whether  the  adoption  of  some  proposition  of  that  sort,  still 
reserving   an    ultimate   power    in    the    Legislature   to   direct    local 


45  Doc.  No.  13 

representatives  of  the  people,  as  to  whether  they  might  not  remove 
some  opposition  to  the  introduction  of  a  budget  system  — 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  Then  the  whole  question  would  be  whether  it 
was  a  step  which  was  at  all  effectived 

M  r.  Austin. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Wagner. —  On  matters  of  appropriation  I  should  think  it 
would  be.  if  you  made  the  vote  high  enough. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  I  mean  it  would  not  be  a  case  where  a  man's 
desire  to  please  another,  a  fellow  member,  in  return  for  his  pleas- 
ing you  afterwards  would  override  party  considerations? 

Mr.  Wagner. —  Well,  of  course,  human  nature  is  human  nature, 
and  you  cannot  say  that  will  eliminate  that  feature  of  legislative 
life,  but  I  think  it  would  make  it  more  difficult  than  it  is  now  to 
pass  bills  of  that  character. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  Have  you  any  suggestions,  Senator,  as  to  how 
high  it  would  be  necessary  to  have  such  restriction  in  order  to  be 
effective  ? 

Mr.  Wagner. — ■  If  you  want  to  make  it  effective  at  all  I  should 
say  you  should  make  it  three-quarters,  because  if  there  are  party 
lines,  and  there  are  always  party  lines,  it  is  rarely  that  any  one 
party  has  three-quarters  control  of  the  Legislature.  I  never  re- 
member it.     So  that  would  be  quite  an  effective  check. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  Have  you  gentlemen  any  further  questions  to 
ask  Doctor  Goodnow  ? 

(No  response.) 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  Then,  Doctor,  I  want  to  tell  you  that  I  am 
sure  that  my  Committee  and  I  am  also  sure  that  both  Committees 
are  very  much  obliged  to  you  for  coming  here  this  long  distance 
and  giving  us  this  very  instructive  talk  to-day. 

Mr.  Taxxer. —  I  move  that  a  vote  of  thanks  on  behalf  of  both 
Committees  be  extended  to  Doctor  Goodnow. 

Which  motion  was  duly  seconded  and  unanimously  carried. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  We  thank  you,  Dr.  Goodnow;  it  has  been  a 
great  honor  to  have  had  you  with  us. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN   CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.   14 


JOINT  MEETING  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  GOVERNOR 
AND  OTHER  STATE  OFFICERS,  AND  COMMITTEE 
ON  FINANCE,  WITH  HON.  A.  LAWRENCE  LOWELL, 
PRESIDENT  OF  HARVARD  UNIVERSITY 


Senate  Chamber,  Capitol  Building, 
Albany,  New  York,  June  10,  1915,  3:00  p.  m. 
Hon.  Henry  L.  Stimson,  and  Hon.  Frederick  C.  Tanner, 
presided  as  Chairmen  of  their  respective  Committees. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Will  the  Committees  kindly  come  to  order  ? 
Gentlemen,  we  have  the  pleasure  of  having  with  us  to-day,  Doctor 
LoweU,  the  President  of  Harvard  University.  During  the  course 
of  the  meetings  of  the  'Committee  on  Finance,  as  the  members  of 
that  Committee  will  remember,  a  question  came  up  as  to  the 
methods  of  budget-making  which  were  in  practice  in  other  coun- 
tries, particularly  other  English  speaking  countries,  and,  in  order 
to  get  the  best  possible  authority  an  those  methods,  it  was  sug- 
gested that  we  invite  one  of  the  greatest  living  American  authori- 
ties on  that  subject. 

Doctor  Lowell,  who  is  known,  of  course,  to  all  of  you,  from  his 
study  of  the  governmental  methods  in  Great  Britain  particularly, 


Doc.  jSto.   14  2 

as  well  as  the  other  countries  of  Europe,  has  kindly  consented  to 
come  here  and  speak  to  us  this  afternoon  about  the  methods  of 
budget-making  in  England,  incidentally,  and  also  the  methods 
by  which  the  executive  functions  of  that  government  are  carried 
on,  and  classified  and  co-ordinated. 

Doctor,  the  methods  of  these  two  Committees  have  been  very 
informal,  and  I  understand  that  you  would  be  glad  to  be  inter- 
rupted with  questions  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  I  should,  at  any  time. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  And  I,  therefore,  suggest  that  if  you  will  take 
the  matter  into  your  own  hands  and  proceed  in  your  own  way  on 
those  subjects,  you  will  probably  find  a  good  many  of  us  will  be 
anxious  for  light  and  will  ask  you  questions  during  the  course 
of  your  remarks. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Thank  you,  sir.  I  should  like  to  be  inter- 
rupted and  asked  questions,  because  that  is  the  only  way  to  get 
information,  I  am  here  not  to  give  a  lecture,  but  to  give  such 
information  as  anyone  may  desire,  and  I  want  to  say  in  beginning 
this,  I  want  to  have  it  clearly  understood  that  I  have  no  idea 
that  any  foreign  methods  in  any  government  can  ever  be  trans- 
planted into  another  country  and  work  the  way  they  do  at  home; 
that  all  you  can  do  is  to  get  suggestions  and  hints.  In  fact,  I 
have  spent  a  good  deal  of  my  effort  in  life  in  trying  to  find  out 
that  it  is  impossible  to  transplant  any  institution  into  a  new  soil. 
and  expect  the  same  fruit  and  yield  in  its  new  soil.  You  can  get 
suggestions,  but  you  cannot  bodily  transplant  anything.  You  can 
merely  get  ideas. 

The  English  budget  system,  of  course,  rests  upon  a  principle  that 
we  have  not  in  this  country,  and  have  no  approach  to  it.  That  is. 
the  Legislature,  who  resigns  whenever  it  loses  the  confidence  of 
the  Legislature;  that  is,  whenever  an  adverse  vote  is  passed  by 
the  Legislature  on  any  important  point.  Of  course,  one  must 
bear  in  mind  that  fact  for  much  pressure  which  the  Legislature 
exerts  on  the  Executive,  and  which  the  Executive  exerts  on  the 
Legislature  is  due  to  the  fact  that  the  Executive  has  no  independ- 
ent origin.  It  is  not  like  ours,  elected  by  the  people  independently 


3  Doc.  No.  14 

of  Parliament,  but  is  elected  practically  by  Parliament  itself, 
informally  elected.  That  is,  it  is  the  leaders  of  the  party  in  the 
House  of  Commons. 

Now,  the  way  in  which  the  budget  is  originally  devised  is  this : 
Early  in  the  autumn  the  various  departments  make  up  their 
estimates  of  what  they  will  need  for  the  current  year,  and,  of 
course,  like  all  human  things,  they  make  up  their  estimate  some- 
what larger  than  they  can  expect  to  get.  Any  aggressive  concern 
wants  to  spend  more  money  than  it  has,  because  it  feels  the  useful- 
ness of  it.  Therefore,  those  first  departmental  estimates  are 
somewhat  larger  than  can  be  very  well  granted.  Those  estimates 
are  submitted  to  the  head  of  the  department  by  the  different 
branches  of  the  department  beneath  it.  He  goes  over  them, 
probably  cuts  them  down  a  little  in  most  cases,  and  then  they  are 
passed  into  the  Treasury,  the  head  of  which  is  known  as  the 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer;  he  goes  over  them  and  sees  how  he 
can  raise  money  to  meet  them,  and,  of  course,  he  cuts  down  to 
some  extent,  and  sometimes  there  is  a  sharp  quarrel  between 
different  departments,  between  the  Treasury  and  some  other  de- 
partment, on  the  question  whether  he  can  see  his  way  clear  to 
raise  the  money,  raise  money  enough  to  meet  the  demands  of  those 
departments. 

One  famous  case  of  that  was  the  time  when  Lord  Randolph 
Churchill,  who  was  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  fell  out  of  office, 
fell  out  of  public  life  forever,  as  it  turned  out.  He  tried  to  cut 
down  the  estimates  for  the  War  Department,  and  it  resulted  in  a 
difference,  and  a  sharp  difference  between  him  and  the  War 
Department,  and  the  War  Department  had  the  matter  brought  up 
before  the  whole  Cabinet,  and  the  whole  Cabinet  decided  for  the 
requirements  for  the  army  that  the  army  wanted,  and  Lord 
Randolph  Churchill  tendered  his  resignation.  The  cut  was 
against  him,  and  he  went  out. 

When  those  estimates  have  been  approved  or  cut  down,  or 
arranged  by  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  he  is  then  ready 
to  bring  them  into  Parliament,  which  he  does. 

Now,  I  ought  to  explain  what  is  a  little  difficult  to  follow,  a 
little  something  of  the  procedure  in  the  House  of  Commons, 
because,  without  that,  it  is  difficult  to  understand  what  the  differ- 
ent steps  of  the  process  mean,  and  what  their  real  significance  is. 


Doc.  No.   14  4 

You  must  remember  that  the  appropriations  in  England  that 
are  made  lapse  at  the  end  of  the  year  for  which  they  are  made. 
Unlike  the  French  appropriations,  for  instance,  which  run  over 
indefinitely,  or  our  appropriations  —  I  don't  know  how  it  is  in 
Xew  York,  but  in  Massachusetts  our  appropriations  lapse  at  the 
end  of  the  year  next  following'  the  one  when  it  is  appropriated. 

Mr.  Sttmson". —  Two  years,  yes. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  When  does  the  fiscal  year  begin.  Doctor  Lowell '. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  The  fiscal  year  begins  the  first  of  April,  and 
the  appropriations  lapse  then.  Parliament  meets  usually  early 
in  February,  and  the  first  thing  that  has  to  be  done  is  to  make  up 
for  any  over-run  that  they  are  likely  to  have.  That  is,  the  first 
thing  to  do  is  to  ask  Parliament  to  cover  any  excess,  which  is  very 
sure  to  occur,  before  the  first  of  April.  For  however  well  your 
government  is  conducted,  there  are  certain  to  be  some  unforeseen 
expenses  in  some  way  or  other,  which  will  necessarily  require 
additional  appropriations.  The  amount  in  England  is  very  slight. 
They  rarely  over-run  more  than  three  or  four  per  cent.,  except  in 
case  of  war.  Of  course,  in  this  war  and  in  the  South  African 
War,  they  may  over-run  to  any  extent,  but  ordinarily  the  calcula- 
tions are  very  close,  about  three  or  four  per  cent.  The  first  thing 
the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  does  is  to  bring  requests  for 
those  excesses,  whatever  they  may  be.  Those  are  called  excess 
drafts. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  Is  there  any  statute  preventing  an  officer  from 
overrunning  his  appropriation  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes,  1  will  explain  that  when  it  comes  to 
the  audit. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  there  are  very  elaborate  rules  which  T  can 
point  out  to  you,  and  which  it  is  hardly  worth  while  to  go  into. 
As  a  rule,  your  budget  is  voted  by  headings.  There  are  different 
departments,  and  under  each  department  the  headings  are  differ- 
ent. The  rule  is  that  you  cannot  transfer  from  one  grant  to 
another,  or  exceed  any  grant,  except  in  the  Army  and  Navy  where 
you  can  transfer  from  any  one  grant  in  the  army  to  any  other 
grant  in  the  army.     Tf  you  want  to  take  things  from  the  clothing 


5  Doc.  No.   11 

of  soldiers  and  spend  that  money  on  ammunition,  you  can  do  it. 
In  no  other  department  can  you  do  those  things. 

After  he  has  brought  in  his  excess  grants  to  make  up  for  any 
deficiency  in  the  past  year,  he  then  brings  in  his  estimate  for  the 
coming  year,  and,  inasmuch  as  he  cannot  possibly  get  this  passed 
before  the  first  of  April,  he  gets  some  grant  on  account. 

Mr.  Stimson. — About  what  time  of  the  year  are  those  esti- 
mates brought  in  '. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Those  estimates  are  brought  in  usually  about 
the  first  of  March.  He  has  only  about  a  month,  and  he  only  gets 
some  provisional  grants,  enough  to  carry  them  along  for  two  or 
three  months,  which  will  be  certainly  granted  anyway,  because  they 
are  much  less  than  will  be  granted  during  the  year. 

Here  is  the  most  important  point  of  all :  When  he  brings  this 
in,  there  is  a  rule  adopted,  as  early  as  1706,  I  think  it  was,  and 
made  by  sessional  order,  and  finally  made  the  permanent  order  of 
the  House  in,  I  think,  1713  —  I  could  give  you  the  exact  dates, 
but  I  am  within  a  couple  of  years,  anyway,  of  the  date  —  pro- 
viding that  no  motion  shall  be  made  in  the  House  of  'Commons 
for  any  grant  out  of  the  public  revenue,  except  upon  the  recom- 
mendation of  a  minister  of  the  Crown ;  in  other  words,  a  member 
of  the  Cabinet,  and  that  always,  of  course,  means  the  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer,  because  he  makes  all  fiscal  motions. 

No  motion  can  be  entertained  by  the  House  of  Commons,  ac- 
cording to  its  standing  order,  for  any  grant  from  the  public  treas- 
ury, except  on  the  recommendation  of  a  Minister  of  the  Crown. 

Now,  that  has  received  a  very  wide  extension,  and  has  been 
copied  in  all  the  British  colonies.  It  goes  right  through  the 
English  world. 

The  reason  wras  this  —  a  reason  which  we  are  perfectly  familiar 
with  in  this  country,  and  that  is  the  tendency  of  individual  mem- 
bers to  try  to  get  individual  grants  for  local  or  personal  purposes. 
A  man  is  much  interested  in  building  a  post-office  in  his  town,  or 
whatever  it  may  be.  It  is  a  thing  we  are  all  so  familiar  with. 
It  was  in  order  to  stop  that  as  early  as  200'  years  ago,  that  they 
put  in  this  rule.  There  have  been  attempts  to  dodge  that.  For 
instance,  instead  of  introducing  a  motion  for  a  grant  to  be  paid 


Doc.  No.   14  6 

out  of  the  public  treasury,  there  would  be  introduced  a  motion 
to  be  paid  out  of  moneys  to  be  hereafter  voted  by  Parliament,  and 
then  the  House  of  'Commons  having  voted  in  favor  of  that,  they 
have  practically  expressed  their  opinion,  and  the  government  has 
to  bring  in  a  recommendation,  and  find  the  money,  because  the 
House  had  already  expressed  its  opinion.  That  was  dodged  by 
adding  a  few  words  to  the  motion,  saying  it  could  be  paid  out  of 
the  public  revenues,  or  sums  to  be  hereafter  provided  by  Parlia- 
ment, et  cetera. 

You  have  to  continually  stop  leaks  which  will  occur,  of  course, 
in  any  legal  procedure.  The  object  was  this:  It  was  to  prevent 
an  expression  of  opinion  in  favor  of  an  expenditure  before  the 
government  thought  it  wise  to  make  it.  In  other  words,  the  whole 
art,  of  course,  as  we  all  know,  is  having  the  right  of  initiative. 

If  you  give  every  individual  member  of  the  House  a  right  to 
initiate  things,  it  may  be  very  hard  for  the  House  and  the  Min- 
ister to  refuse  them,  although  in  their  best  judgment,  they  know 
it  is  not  wise,  and,  for  that  purpose,  the  right  of  the  initiative  in 
expenditures  is  taken  away  from  the  individual  member,  and 
placed  in  the  hands  of  the  government.  Why?  I  think  fur  a 
very  good  reason,  and  that  is  that  the  House  of  Commons  does 
not  represent,  and  no  legislative  body  ought  to  represent,  a  lot  of 
individual  interests.  It  ought  to  represent  the  public  at  large. 
And  the  only  body  that  represents  the  public  at  large  is  the  Min- 
istry, which  stands  for  the  whole  country.  In  other  words,  they 
do  not  want  the  individual  member  to  make  motions  to  pay  money 
on)  of  the  treasury  that  belongs  to  the  public  at  large,  for  the 
benefit  of  the  interest  of  his  personal  constituent;  he  ought  to  be 
there  to  represent  the  public  at  large.  And,  although  the  things 
he  wants  to  spend  money  on,  may  be  a  thing  that  is  perfectly 
proper  for  him  as  representing  his  constituents,  it  is  not  proper 
for  him  to  put  his  hand  into  the  treasury  to  take  it  out  And  the 
people  who  represent  the  whole  public  are  the  Ministers,  who 
represent  the  whole  majority  of  the  House. 

T  think  that  has  proven  in  England,  undoubtedly,  to  be  a  very 
wise  prevention.  It  has  made  it  possible  to  know  just  where  you 
are  coming  out;  it  has  made  it  possible  for  the  Treasurer  to  plan 
his  expenditures,  and  taxes,  so  they  will  meet,  and  so  that  they  will 
cover  any  deficit. 


7  Doc.  No.   14 

I  was  looking  a  while  ago  at  how  closely  they  brought  their 
estimates  of  expenditures  and  revenues  tog-ether.  \  find  that,  ex- 
cept for  a  period  of  the  Boer  war,  in  twenty-five  years  I  think 
they  have  never  been  4  per  cent,  apart,  and  in  fifteen  years  they 
have  been  only  a  per  cent,  and  a  half  apart.  That  is  very  close 
financial  calculation,  and,  as  T  say,  the  results  always  come  out 
within  three  or  four  per  cent,  of  what  they  calculate  for  British 
taxes.    All  others,  for  legacy  taxes,  are  even  more  easily  calculated. 

Mr.  Low. — -How  is  the  private  member,  on  his  motions,  to  get 
the  money  for  his  own  district  ?  How  does  he  proceed  to  bring  the 
needs  of  his  district  to  the  attention  of  the  government  \ 

Dr.  Lowell. —  He  has  to  go  to  government  offices.  But,  as 
a  matter  of  fact,  very  small  appropriations  are  made  for  local  pur- 
poses in  England.  I  do  not  mean  to  say  post-offices,  of  course, 
which  are  government  agencies,  but  there  is  very  little  such  as 
appropriating  money  for  local  purposes.  It  is  peculiarly  true  that 
local  things  are  paid  for  by  local  taxation.  There  is  a  singularly 
small  amount  of  local  expenditure  by  the  government  except,  as 
I  say.  the  large  governmental  purposes,  and  the  question  of 
whether  you  need  a  post-office,  if  you  please,  is  determined  by  the 
Post-Office  Department. 

Mr.  Stimsobt. —  This  provision  that  you  speak  of  preventing 
additional  items  to  the  budget,  except  on  the  recommendation  of 
the  government,  has  that  operated  to  make  possible  the  keeping 
of  the  estimates  and  expenditures  closely  together  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes,  sir;  because  the  government  calculates  just 
what  its  estimates  are  going  to  be,  and  what  taxation  will  be 
required. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  And  that  is  not  subject  to  increase  in  the 
House  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Xo,  sir,  the  House not  only  can  it  make  no 

motion  for  a  new  grant  —  that  has  been  interpreted  to  mean  no 
one  can  make  any  motion  for  an  increase.  If  the  government 
asks  for  $100,000,  some  one  cannot  get  up  and  move  to  make  it 
$110,000.     You  can  move  to  reduce  or  throw  out  altogether. 

You  asked  me  how  thev  bring  their  local  needs  to  the  attention 


Doc.  ~No.  14  8 

of  the  public.  It  is  not  unfrequently  that  a  man  moves  to  reduce 
an  appropriation  by  100  pounds,  to  draw  attention  to  the  fact 
that  they  need  100'  pounds  more.  But  you  will  notice  his  vote  is 
of  no  consequence.     That  has  happened  on  sundry  occasions. 

I  remember  there  were  a  number  of  cases  of  appropriation  for 
Ireland,  one  for  the  education  of  the  poor  in  Ireland,  and  one  of 
the  Irish  members  moved  to  reduce  the  appropriation  for  Ireland 
by  100  pounds,  as  basis  for  criticism  of  the  Irish  educational 
policy  in  not  bringing  in  the  Celtic  language  in  the  public  schools 
more  fully  than  was  done  and,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  that,  in  a  very 
thin  House,  was  carried.  Well,  the  government  said  this  is  an 
accident,  it  is  a  small  House,  and  we  do  not  feel  obliged  to  resign 
on  that,  and  Balfour  laughed  and  said  "  Ireland  gets  100  pounds 
less  for  education, "  and  that  is  all  that  has  been  done.  And 
another  one  said,  "  Well,  the  defeat  of  the  government  on  that  is 
worth  100  pounds  to  Ireland."  That  I  bring  out  because  it  illus- 
trates the  point  I  want  to  make,  which  is  this  method  of  reducing 
expenditure,  or,  indeed,  even  without  making  a  motion  to  reduce 
expenditure,  the  debate  on  those  items  gives  an  enormously  full 
opportunity  for  criticism  of  whatever  the  government  is  doing. 

Disraeli  said  once  that  Parliament  is  the  great  inquest  of  the 
nation.  It  is  not  merely  a  legislative  body.  Parliament  to-day 
legislates  very  little.  If  you  take  the  thickness  of  the  statute  book, 
as  a  rule  it  is  comparatively  small,  and  the  legislation  that  it  does 
pass  is  almost  all  drawn  up  by  the  Cabinet,  and  with  practically 
no  amendment  that  the  Cabinet  does  not  agree  to.  The  private 
members  can  bring  in  bills,  but  practically  they  cannot  pass  them 
if  there  is  any  considerable  amount  of  opposition  on  anybody's 
part  to  them.  Parliament  is  not  a  groat  legislative  machine;  it 
is  really  the  Cabinet  that  legislates,  with  the  advice  and  consent 
of  Parliament.  But  Parliament,  is  the  greatest  inquest  in  the 
world.  That  is,  it  is  the  body  which  keeps  the  closest  observation 
on  the  working  of  the  Executive  government,  upon  the  adminis- 
tration of  affairs,  of  any  body  in  the  world. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  It  is  a  perpetual  committee  of  investigation? 

Dr.  Lowell.— It  is  a  perpetual  committee  ef  investigation; 
and  I  take  it  that  is  what  the  representatives  of  the  public  ought 
to  do  far  more  than  what  thev  do  it  in  this  country.     It  is  the 


9  Doc.  No.   14 

eves  of  the  English  community.  You  know  very  well  you  can 
pick  up  any  English  paper  where  you  get  debates  in  Parliament, 
and  you  will  see  the  amount  of  investigation  that  is  going  on  all 
the  time.  If  anything  happens  in  Scotland  or  Ireland  or  way 
out  in  the  Indies,  you  will  see  they  may  question  about  it,  and 
when  the  budget  comes  up  for  consideration,  there  is  a  great  field 
day. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  I  think  the  'Committee  may  not  know  how  that 
method  of  investigation  is  carried  on. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  There  are  various  ways,  but  the  one  I  want  to 
call  to  your  attention  now  is  the  way  in  which  it  is  done  in  the 
discussion  of  the  estimates.  Estimates  are  brought  in ;  they  are 
a  thick  volume.  The  first  thing  that  comes  up  is  the  civil  list. 
and  the  support  of  royal  palaces,  et  cetera.  It  used  to  be  they  had 
to  take  those  up  in  order  as  they  stood  in  the  estimates.  Appro- 
priations for  royal  palaces.  Somebody  would  make  some  absurd 
remark  about  that,  and  it  really  wasted  time,  and  then  by  the 
time  they  got  down  to  the  great  and  important  items  of  the  Army 
and  Navy,  there  was  no  time  left  to  debate.  Tt  was  about  time  for 
Parliament  to  adjourn.  Therefore,  Balfour  introduced  this  sys- 
tem :  He  said,  "  I  will  take  up  in  order  first,  any  part  of  the  esti- 
mates that  any  considerable  number  of  people  would  like  to  have 
taken  up."  Well,  the  Irish  member  said.  "  We  would  like  to 
have  the  Irish  matters  taken  up  first,"  and  the  Scotchman  said 
they  would  like  to  have  the  Scotch  matters  taken  up;  the  people 
interested  in  the  Army  said,  "  We  will  take  up  the  Army."  He 
said,  "  Which  items  would  you  like  to  discuss?  "  They  said  item 
No.  so-and-so.  Very  well,  this  item  No.  so-and-so,  then  under 
that  item  you  can  discuss  anything  with  which  it  is  connected. 
And  there  are  certain  general  items  under  which  you  can  discuss 
anything.  For  example,  the  salary  of  the  Secretary  of  State  for 
War,  under  that  you  can  discuss  the  whole  administration,  the 
whole  equipment  of  the  Army,  the  whole  policy  the  Army  is  pur- 
suing, the  way  in  which  they  are  carrying  on  the  war  in  Flanders 
or  in  the  Dardanelles.  It  really  is  not  done  for  financial  pur- 
poses at  all  because,  as  a.  matter  of  fact,  Parliament  very,  very 
rarely  wants  to  reduce  the  estimates  brought  in  by  the  govern- 
ment,  and  cannot  increase  them.      Therefore,  the  real  object  is 


Doc.  No.  14  10 

criticism  of  the  government  administration ;  and  I  fancy  that  is 
not  a  bad  idea;  that  through  this  system  of  bringing  in  all  those 
estimates  in  succession,  you  get  a  chance  to  put  every  piece  of  the 
government  through  a  fire  of  criticism  and  inquiry  which  searches 
out  anything  that  you  may  choose  to  bring  out. 

For  instance,  the  time  when,  in  1895,  Lord  Roseberry  and  his 
government  went  out.  He  went  out  because  there  was  a  motion 
to  reduce  the  salary  of  the  Secretary  of  State  for  War  by  100 
pounds.  What  for  ?  To  draw  attention  to  the  lack  of  cordite  in 
the  government  arsenals.  You  can  discuss  anything  you  want  to 
bring  up. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  Before  yon  go  further,  may  1  ask  this  question  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  Who  is  in  the  ministry  that  has  the  final  say 
as  to  the  maximum  of  those  appropriations  ?  Is  it  the  Chancellor 
of  the  Exchequer,  or  is  it  agreed  upon  at  a  whole  Cabinet  meeting  \ 

Dr.  Lowell. —  The  estimate  is  brought  in  by  the  particular 

minister,  let  us  say,  the  Minister  of  War;  he  takes  it  to  the 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer.  If  they  agree,  that  is  done.  No- 
body practically  reviews  it;  it  goes  through.  If  they  disagree  and 
cannot  adjust  their  differences,  the  whole  Cabinet  must  decide 
between  them.  In  other  words,  the  complete  executive  must  de- 
cide in  the  long  run.  That  obviously  must  be  so.  If  we  had  it  in 
our  system,  it  would  be  our  government.  And,  of  course,  there 
is  always  some  struggle. 

The  way  in  which  the  procedure  goes  through  in  the  House  of 
Commons,  it  is  very  much  like  ours,  though  it  is  much  more 
elaborately  carried  out.  The  first  service  is  submitting  the  esti- 
mates. The  estimates  are  submitted  to  a  Committee  of  the  Whole 
on  supply,  and  are  gone  through  there.  Then  the  committee  re- 
ports to  the  House. 

Then  when  that  committee  —  when  that  report  has  been  ac- 
cepted by  the  House,  a  bill  is  brought  in  to  pay  that  money  out  of 
the  treasury,  but  the  first  procedure  is  getting  through  the  esti- 
mates. You  begin  with  the  detail,  and  very  properly  sn,  because 
vour    object    is    the   criticism    of   the    action    of    the   government. 


11  Doc.  No.  14 

When  you  are  through  with  the  detail,  you  bring  in  a  bill  to  carry 
out  the  items  which  have  been  voted. 

They  have  a  system  which  we  also  have  inherited  somewhat: 
The  money  is  paid  out  of  the  consolidated  fund.  All  the  money 
that  comes  in  revenue  goes  into  the  consolidated  fund;  all  the 
money  which  goes  out,  goes  out  of  the  consolidated  fund,  and  the 
first  estimates  that  are  brought  in  are  simply  estimates  of  supply ; 
then  the  amount  of  those  estimates  so  approved  by  the  House 
should  be  paid  out  of  the  consolidated  fund.  You  understand,  of 
course,  that  there  are  a  certain  number  of  expenditures  which  are 
paid  every  year  without  a  vote.  For  instance,  the  King's  salary, 
what  they  call  the  civil  list,  the  interest  on  the  national  debt, 
salaries  of  the  auditor  generally  are  all  paid  out  of  the  consoli- 
dated fund,  without  any  estimate  being  put  forward  at  all. 

Mr.  Rhees. —  Is  the  auditor  a  member  of  the  Cabinet  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  No ;  I  was  coming  to  that. 

Let  us  suppose  we  have  got  that  bill  passed  through,  for  paying 
that  money  out  of  the  consolidated  fund,  and  you  now  have  got 
to  get  the  money  into  your  consolidated  fund.  To  do  that,  the 
Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  brings  in  what  is  technically  known 
as  the  budget.  He  virtually  says  to  Parliament,  "  Now  I  am 
going  to  show  you  how  I  am  going  to  get  the  money  for  that,"  and 
that  is  the  really  most  interesting  thing  to  them,  because  you 
know  the  English  government  is  changing  its  taxing  continually; 
it  adds  two  or  three  pennies  of  income  tax,  and  everybody  groans, 
and  it  takes  a  little  duty  off  tea,  and  there  is  another  groan.  And 
lately,  you  know  they  have  been  talking  about  new  sources  of 
supply,  and  creating  a  great  deal  of  feeling  both  pro  and  con. 

That  is  technically  his  budget,  his  account  of  how  he  proposes 
to  raise  the  money  to  reach  the  expenditures  that  have  been  voted. 

When  those  are  also  brought  in,  in  the  same  way  in  Committee, 
approved  by  the  House,  and  then  a  bill,  called  the  Finance  Bill,  is 
founded  on  those. 

The  expenditures  and  estimates  for  the  year  are  voted  about 
August,  when  the  year  has  got  about  a  third  way  through. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Has  any  action  been  taken  on  the  estimates 
at  the  time  that  the  budget,  as  you  speak  of  it,  is  brought  in  ? 


Doc.  "No.  14  12 

Dr.  Lowell. —  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  two  are  running  par- 
allel.    Part  have  been  passed  and  part  have  not. 

Mr.  Stimson.—  I  see ;  but  this  final  passage  in  August  that 
you  speak  of,  is  the  passage  of  the  budget  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Nowadays,  the  whole  of  the  estimates  are 
put  in  with  the  expenditures  in  one  big  bill,  and  passed  through 
finally  as  a  bill.  They  sum  up  everything  that  has  been  done 
before,  and  that  is  called  the  Finance  Bill. 

Mr.  Stimsoist. —  In  March  the  estimates  come  in  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  In  March  the  estimates  come  in. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Then  there  is  a  period  of  investigation  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Then  there  is  a  period  of  investigation,  and 
while  that  is  progressing  somewhere  about  —  usually  early  in 
April,  the  budget  is  brought  in,  and  the  discussion  of  the  taxa- 
tion and  of  the  expenses  go  on  parallel,  side  by  side,  until  the 
end  of  the  season,  and  they  are  summed  up  together  in  the 
Finance  Bill. 

Mr.  IsTicoll. —  What  happens  to  the  budget  when  the  govern- 
ment falls? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  The  new  government  comes  in  and  brings 
in  a  slightly  changed  estimate,  and  you  have  to  do  the  same  process 
over  again.  That  happened  in  this  case  when  Lord  Roseberry 
went  out.  A  new  government  conies  in,  and  then  they  will  say, 
"  We  have  not  got  time  to  make  a  new  budget,  and  we  will  change1 
it  a  little  and  pass  it."  If  the  new  government  fails,  there  is  a 
new  election,  and  before  the  new  election  there  is  a  special  vote 
to  authorize  such  expenditures  till  Parliament  meets  again.  That 
is  a  temporary  measure. 

ISTow,  I  want  to  speak  about  how  these  tilings  are  ordered.  You 
have  got  to  know  your  appropriations,  your  expenditures  are  all 
voted.  I  have  explained  how  when  the  expenditures  exceed  the 
estimates,  or  are  going  to  exceed  the  estimates,  the  government, 
towards  the  end  of  the  year,  makes  excess  grants  to  cover  them, 
so  that  they  shall  not  be  spending  money  without  approval. 

There  are  three  forms  of  account  that  come  in.     The  govern- 


13  Doc.  ]STo.  14 

ment  makes  two,  or  rather  the  auditor  makes  one  and  the  com- 
mittee makes  another.  The  government,  very  quickly  after  the 
ending  of  the  year,  brings  in  a  short  account  of  the  total  of 
expenditures  and  receipts,  so  you  can  see  how  the  finances  bal- 
ance for  the  year. 

That  does  not  attempt  to  give  the  amount  expended  under  each 
item,  but  only  under  the  general  large  grant.  That  can  be  made 
up  quite  rapidly,  and  is  handed  in  very  shortly  after,  a  couple  of 
months  after  the  close  of  the  year,  a  general  account  simply  giv- 
ing a  sort  of  balance. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  That  is  after  the  close  of  the  fiscal  year  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  After  the  close  of  the  fiscal  year,  which  closes 
the  first  of  April.  Within  a  couple  of  months  the  balance  sheet 
is  brought  in  by  the  government.  Then  the  matter  is  sent  to  the 
auditor  —  it  takes  the  auditor  longer.  The  auditor  is  not  a  mem- 
ber of  the  government.  His  salary  is  not  appropriated  by  Parlia- 
ment. His  salary  is  paid  like  that  of  the  judges,  out  of  the  con- 
solidated fund,  without  action  of  Parliament,  so  that  he  is  com- 
pletely independent.  He  is  appointed  by  the  House  of  Commons, 
and  not  by  the  government,  and,  consequently,  he  is  made  just 
as  independent  as  anybody  can  be  made.  He  goes  through  all 
the  expenditures  of  the  year. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  He  exercises  no  executive  or  legislative  func- 
tions whatever? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  He  has  nothing  whatever  to  do  with  the  con- 
trol of  expenditures,  but  makes  a  report  upon  it. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  He  is  wholly  unlike  the  office  of  the  Comp- 
troller in  the  State  of  New  York,  who  is  both  an  auditor  and 
an  executive? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Well,  the  'Comptroller  is  a  treasurer. 

Mr.  Stimson.—  In  the  case  of  the  English  auditor,  he  is 
purely  an  auditor  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  He  is  purely  an  auditor.  The  Comptroller 
here  is  a  treasurer  to  a  certain  extent;  he  is  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury. 


Doc.  No.  14  14 

Mr.  Stimson. —  And  also  a  tax  collector  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes,  sir ;  and  the  aduitor  is  nothing  but  a 
man  who  goes  over  the  accounts.  He  simply  takes  all  of  those 
accounts  and  goes  through  them.  He  not  only  reports  what  money 
has  been  spent  and  gets  vouchers  for  the  payment  to  show  that 
there  is  no  fraud,  but  he  also  goes  through  each  item  to  see  that 
it  is  within  the  amount  that  was  appropriated,  and  that  that  money 
was  spent  as  directed  by  the  vote  of  Parliament.  In  other  words, 
he  not  merely  examines  to  see  that  the  money  is  properly  spent 
and  that  nobody  puts  it  in  their  pockets,  but  he  also  sees  that  it 
has  been  spent  for  the  purposes  for  which  it  was  appropriated; 
and,  of  course,  it  very  often  happens  that  the  money  was  not 
spent  just  exactly  as  it  was  appropriated.  Sometimes  the  govern- 
ment, as  I  say,  has  power,  as  it  has  for  instance  in  the  case  of 
the  army,  to  expend  for  one  purpose  money  voted  for  another,  but 
in  that  case  the  Auditor  needs  the  facts,  and  gets  the  explanation 
of  the  War  Department  why  it  was  so  spent.  In  other  words,  he 
goes  through  the  accounts,  sees  that  they  are  properly  vouched, 
and  annotates  them,  showing  if  there  was  anything  which  was  in 
any  way  irregular,  his  explanation  of  it,  and  a  statement  on  his 
part  that  it  was  justified  or  not  justified,  as  he  thinks. 

Then,  when  he  comes  in,  or  when  his  report  comes  in,  which, 
as  yon  notice,  takes  about  a  year  to  prepare,  that  is,  nearly  a  year, 
that  is  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Accounts  of  the  House  of 
Commons,  which  again  is  an  independent  committee  which  has 
no  connection  with  the  government. 

Mr.  Tanner, —  What  is  it  that  determines  his  tenure  of  office? 
He  does  not  go  out  with  the  Cabinet  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  No ;  he  is  elected  by  the  House. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  For  any  definite  time  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  No.  As  I  remember,  there  is  no  term  at  all. 
I  do  not  remember  now  whether  he  is  elected  during  good  behavior, 
or  elected  from  year  to  year,  but  those  things  are  regulated  practi- 
cally by  custom. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  He  is  independent  of  the  government? 


15  Doc.  No.   14 

Dr.  Lowell. —  He  is  independent  of  the  government,  and  lie  is 
like  the  Speaker  of  the  House,  and  is  totally  independent. 
Mr.  Stimsoist. — ■  You  mean  the  English  Speaker  ? 
Dr.  Lowell. —  I  mean  the  English  Speaker. 

Mr.  Ehees. —  May  I  ask  whether  the  auditor  has  no  function 
before  the  end  of  the  year  ?  He  does  not  have  to  certify  accounts 
for  payment  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  No.  If  I  am  right,  he  has  no  function  what- 
ever to  the  House,  except  the  making  of  his  report  upon  the 
expenses. 

Mr.  Rhees. —  After  the  year  is  over  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  After  the  year  is  over  ? 

Mr.  Rhees. —  Yes. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Of  course  an  officer  may  go  to  him  and  say,  "  If 
I  made  this  expenditure,  would  you  be  able  to  certify  it?  "  There 
is  a  certain  amount  of  that  done,  but  he  has  no  control  over  it. 

Mr.  Rhees. —  His  signature  does  not  have  to  appear  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  No,  except  that  he  certifies  during  the  year,  he 
has  to  make  a  certificate  when  a  vote  is  passed  by  the  House,  he 
certifies  to  the  Bank  of  England  that  the  vote  has  been  passed 
which  authorizes  the  payment.     See  what  I  mean  ? 

Mr.  Rhees. —  Yes. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  He  certifies  to  the  Bank  of  England  that  such 
votes  have  been  passed,  but  he  has  no  control  whatever  over  the 
expenditure  of  money.  He  simply  certifies  everything  —  ex- 
amines it  and  certifies. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  He  is  a  pure  critic  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes.  Then  the  House  of  Commons  go  in  detail 
over  his  report.  If  there  is  anything  irregular  they  have  a  right 
to  call  in  government  officials  and  ask  why  the  irregularities  occur. 
and  they  report  to  the  House,  and  if  they  report  that  there  is  any- 
thing irregular  which  requires  to  be  ratified,  they  ask  the  House 
to  do  it,  and  they  do  it. 


Doc.  "No.  14  16 

Mr.  Stimson.— I  ask  you  tins  question:  Does  he  perform  any 
function  at  all  to  help  the  House  in  the  examination  of  the  gov- 
ernment's estimates  when  they  come  in  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  ~No,  sir ;  none  whatever.  Nothing  whatever  to 
do  with  the  estimate. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  His  duties  are  purely  related  to  the  accounts  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Purely  related  to  the  accounts. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  For  the  preceding  year. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  He  'has  nothing  to  do  with  anything  until  the 
House  has  voted  it.  When  the  House  has  voted  it  he  will  certify 
to  the  bank  that  it  has  been  voted,  and  then  he  sees  that  the  gov- 
ernment spends  it  as  voted. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  The  reason  for  my  question  was  that  it  has 
been  discussed  before  this  Committee,  and  has  been  suggested  by 
a  number  of  the  gentlemen  who  have  been  here,  that  expert  as- 
sistance is  almost  essential  in  order  to  enable  the  legislative  body 
to  perform  its  work  of  criticism  on  the  budget.  I  was  wondering 
whether  this  officer  that  you  spoke  of  in  any  way  took  any  part  in 
that? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  None  whatever.  And  I  suppose  it  would  rather 
change  his  position  if  he  did. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  Yes. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Because  it  is  pretty  hard  to  exercise  both. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  Can  you  inform  us  as  to  whether  there  is  any 
officer  who  has  to  perform  that  duty  of  helping  the  House  in  its 
examination  of  the  items  and  of  the  estimates?  What  is  their 
machinery  to  make  that  examination  effective? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  There  is  no  machinery  for  that,  for  the  simple 
reason  that  thai  machinery  is  the  Cabinet.  You  will  remember 
there  is  one  of  the  things  which  is  peculiar,  and  that  is  the  Cabinet 
member  is  a  member  of  the  House. 

Mr.  Stjmsox. —  Yes. 


17  Doc.  No.  14 

Dr.  Lowell. —  And,  therefore,  the  Cabinet  officers  are  the  con- 
fidential officers  of  the  House.  And  the  criticism  is,  such  criti- 
cism as  there  is,  and  there  is  .a  good  deal  of  pretty  expert  criticism, 
it  comes  from  knowledge  of  members  of  the  Houses.  In  other 
words,  the  Cabinet  represents  the  experts  in  the  government.  It 
is  the  business  of  the  House  to  represent  the  common  opinion  of 
the  ordinary  man. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  May  I  carry  you  back  one  step  further  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Certainly. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Does  the  Cabinet  itself,  when  making  a  pre- 
liminary examination  of  the  estimates  that  come  up  from  the 
different  bureaus,  have  any  experts? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  No. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  And,  if  so,  what  are  they? 

Dr.  Lowell. — ■'No,  sir;  it  has  none;  because,  in  the  depart- 
ment persons,  in  the  bureau  first,  is  the  department,  and  then  each 
department  presents  its  own,  and  the  criticism  there  made  is  made 
by  the  minister.  The  whole  matter  is  a  question  of  action  and  re- 
action between  the  public  and  the  experts  all  the  way  through ; 
because,  for  instance,  let  me  take  a  particular  department  —  say 
the  War  Department:  The  War  Department  brings  in  its  esti- 
mates for  guns,  et  cetera.  Those  estimates  of  the  soldiers' in  the 
War  Department,  of  the  officers  in  charge  of  its  bureau,  do  not  go 
straight  to  the  Parliament  or  to  the  House  of  Commons.  They 
have  to  be  presented  to  the  Secretary  of  State  for  War  who,  except 
for  this  moment  when  we  are  in  war,  is  never  a  soldier  —  he  is  a 
civilian,  he  is  a  member  of  Parliament,  he  is  a  man  in  public  life, 
or,  if  you  like,  he  is  a  statesman.  It  is  his  business  to  bring  the 
ideas  of  the  public  close  in  touch  with  those  of  the  experts  in  his 
department,  and  that  is  done. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  And  such  revision  and  cutting  down  of  the 
original  estimates  of  the  bureau  chief  is  done  by  their  heads  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Is  done  by  their  political  head  ? 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Yes. 


Doc.  No.  14  18 

Dr.  Lowell. —  In  the  first  place,  and  then  by  the  treasury 
afterwards.  In  other  words,  he  says  to  the  men,  "  Now,  General 
So-and-So,  you  want  to  appropriate  so  much  money.  I  have  no 
doubt  you  are  quite  right,  and  I  have  no  doubt  the  army  would 
be  better  off  for  that,  but  I  cannot  induce  the  public  to  spend  that 
much." 

Mr.  Stimson. — ■  They  cannot  stand  for  it  this  year  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  I  cannot  stand  for  it  this  year. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  The  reason  I  asked  you  this  question  is  that 
it  has  been  the  subject  of  very  careful  discussion  before  the  Com- 
mittee. The  estimates  which  come  from  subordinate  bureaus  are 
almost  invariably  based  on  an  exaggerated  notion  of  that  bureau 
chief  of  the  importance  of  his  function. 

Dr.  Lowell. — ■  Always. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  That  is  true  of  the  English,  as  everywhere 
else? 

Dr.  Lowell. — ■  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Then  somebody,  in  a  well  regulated  govern- 
ment, has  to  introduce  a  corrective  on  the  inflated  idea  of  that 
gentleman  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  In  England  who  does  it  ?    His  chief  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  It  is  his  chief.  Of  course  that  goes  right 
through.  You  have  two  bureaus  —  even  the  man  inside  of  the 
bureau  wants  more  than  he  can  get.  The  head  says,  "  There  is  no 
use  of  my  going  to  the  chief  of  the  department  and  asking  him 
for  that  much  money,  we  cannot  get  it."  Then  when  those  esti- 
mates for  those  bureaus  all  come  up  to  the  chief  of  that  depart- 
ment, he  pares  down.  He  says,  "  The  public  will  not  stand  for 
it."  Then  when  the  managers  of  the  different  departments  bring- 
to  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  he  in  turn  says,  "  No  doubt  it 
would  improve  the  efficiency  of  the  government  if  I  could  do  it, 
but  I  cannot  do  it." 

Mr.  Stimson. —  And  so  the  paring  down  goes  on. 


19  Doc.  No.  14 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes,  sir ;  until  it  gets  to  the  Ministers  who 
represent  not  the  experts,  but  the  people.  And  I  maintain  that 
you  never  will  get  good  government  anywhere,  and  never  can,  un- 
less you  represent  both  the  expert  element  and  the  lay  element, 
and  represent  them  both  in  an  effective  way.  You  have  got  to  have 
the  public  represented,  and  you  have  got  to  have  the  expert  repre- 
sented. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  Successful  legislation  is  a  compromise  between 
those  two  kinds  of  bodies,  those  two  points  of  view  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes,  sir.  I  don't  know  whether  I  have  made 
myself  clear,  or  whether  anybody  would  like  to  ask  any  questions. 

Mr.  Low. —  Do  any  agencies  exist  within  the  department  for 
the  preparation  of  those  budgets  originally,  before  they  come  to 
the  department  head  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Oh,  yes.  Each  head  of  a  bureau  prepares  the  es- 
timates for  his  bureau  for  the  coming  year,  then  those  are  com- 
bined, all  the  bureaus  of  each  department  are  combined  together 
into  an  estimate  for  the  department  itself. 

Mr.  Low. —  Is  there  any  committee  of  Parliament,  or  any 
outside  agent  of  any  kind  that  is  looking  into  the  details  of  those 
estimates  during  the  year,  so  as  to  be  able  to  criticize  them  more 
intelligently  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  No.  The  criticism  is  done  after  they  are 
brought  into  Parliament.  The  whole  initiative  of  this  rests  with 
the  departments,  and  with  the  Executive,  and  it  is  only  when 
they  are  brought  into  Parliament  that  criticism  arises.  Then 
there  is  plenty.  A  man  will  often  get  up,  as  in  this  particular 
case  pointed  out,  where  there  was  criticism  that  there  was  a  lack 
of  sufficient  amount  of  high  explosives  in  the  War  Department. 

Mr.  Low. —  I  suppose  then  each  head  —  the  estimates  are  pre- 
pared in  the  first  instance  by  the  permanent  officers  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Permanent  officers. 

Mr.  Low. —  And  the  lay  judgment  is  brought  there  through 
the  political  head,  for  the  time  being? 


Doc.  No.  14  20 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes ;  there  is  no  particular  fear  that  an  expert 
head  of  his  bureau  will  ask  for  less  than  he  needs. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Have  you  any  figures  which  would  give  us  an 
idea  of  the  amount  of  reductions  that  are  normally  made  in  those 
estimates  by  the  heads  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  You  mean  inside  the  bureau  ? 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Inside  the  bureau. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  No ;  I  haven't  that ;  and  that,  of  course,  is  con- 
fidential information. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Which  does  not  come  out  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Which  does  not  come  out.  Not  that  you  cannot 
get  it,  but  it  is  not  published. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  The  first  information  the  public  gets  in  refer- 
ence to  it  is  when  it  comes  out  in  published  form  as  a  final 
document  ? 

Mr.  Paesons. —  Does  the  auditor  ever  criticize  any  expenditure 
that  is  made,  provided  it  is  made  within  the  appropriation? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  No. 

Mr.  Paesons. —  He  cannot  judge  extravagance  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  That  is  not  his  business.  He  is  purely  the 
servant  of  the  House  of  Commons,  to  see  that  what  the  House  of 
Commons  voted  was  carried  out.  In  other  words,  he  has  no 
political  functions.  It  is  not  his  business  to  have  any  opinion 
whether  an  expenditure  is  wise,  but  merely  whether  it  is  legal. 

Mr.  Paesons. —  Suppose  the  opposition    wishes  to  charge  ex- 
avagance;  when  does  it  mak< 
sion  of  the  estimates,  or  when  ? 


travagance;  when  does  it  make  the  charge?     During  the  discus- 


Dr.  Lowell. —  There  are  a  great  many  occasions  for  that. 
One  is  the  time  when  the  estimates  are  under  discussion,  and  the 
estimates  I  say  range  all  over  everything.  Then  there  are  a 
great  many  occasions  where  the  House  of  Commons  can  discuss 
anything  they  want.  Curiously  enough,  when  yon  move  to  ad- 
journ for  a  holiday,  when  you  debate  the  Queen's  speech  —  there 


21  Doc.  No.   14 

are  innumerable  occasions,  and  —  many  of  the  kinds  that  do  not 
interest  you,  because  you  have  no  exact  parallel  to  them,  but  they 
are  coming  up  all  the  time,  when  discussion  may  reach  over  any 
thing'  you  please.  It  does  not  have  to  be  relevant  to  the  motion 
before  the  House.  When  the  Speaker  first  leaves  the  chair  to 
go  into  the  Committee  on  Supply,  and  so  on  —  there  are  a  large 
number  of  technical  occasions  when  anybody  may  call  the  min- 
isters down  and  ask  questions,  and  debate  and  discuss  anything 
that  you  please.  And  there  is  any  amount  of  opportunity  for, 
as  we  should  say,  grilling  the  minister. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  I  was ,  going  to  ask  you  on  that  same  line ; 
have  you  got  with  you  the  rules  that  govern  Question  Day,  as  I 
think  it  is  called  in  the  House  of  Commons  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. — I  haven't  got  the  rules  with  me.  I  could  get 
them  if  you  want  them.     I  remember  them  very  well. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  I  should  be  very  glad  if  you  would  get  them. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  But  it  is  merely  to  ask  a  question  and  not  to 
debate.  You  can  ask  a  question  and  get  information  on  that  par- 
ticular matter  that  you  want  information  about.  You  ask,  for 
instance,  a  question,  and  given  notice  of  it  a  day  or  two  before- 
hand, because,  of  course,  the  ministry  are  not  omniscient,  and  you 
give  notice  three  or  four  days  beforehand  that  on  such  a  morning 
you  will  put  any  question,  whatever  the  nature  may  be ;  anything 
—  it  may  not  necessarily  be  the  act  of  the  ministers.  You  may 
ask  whether  the  cotton  in  Egypt  is  not  equal  to  the  cotton  in 
America,  and  he  will  answer  it,  and  you  can  get  information  in 
that  way  about  the  working  of  anything.  Or  you  can  raise  a 
debate  on  it  by  constant  questions  coming  every  few  days.  If 
we  did  that  sort  of  thing,  we  would  probably  set  a  day  aside  for 
just  that  thing. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Those  questions  are  normally  aimed  at  the 
action  of  the  government  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Mostly. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  There  are  —  their  object  is  to  find  out  what 
the  government  is  doing,  and  how  it  is  executing  its  trust  ? 


Doc.  "No.  14  22 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Perfectly.  I  remember  the  first  time  I  ever 
went  into  the  House  of  Commons,  when  Mr.  Gladstone  asked 
how  it  happened  that  when  some  English  sailors  had  been  wrecked 
on  the  Cannibal  Islands,  the  government  did  not  succeed  in  get- 
ting a  worship  there  for  five  days,  and  when  they  got  there  the 
sailors  had  been  eaten. 

Mr.  Deyo. —  Is  there  any  such  thing  as  parliamentary  investi- 
gation of  expenditures  of  estimates  by  committees  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  You  mean  special  occasions  ? 

Mr.  Deyo.—  Yes. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Oh,  yes ;  there  have  been  a  considerable  num- 
ber of  them.  There  have  been  two  or  three  lately,  within  the 
last  ten  or  fifteen  years.  Every  little  while  Parliament  appoints 
a  committee  to  investigate.  Sometimes  there  is  a  parliamentary 
committee;  sometimes  they  request  the  government  to  appoint 
a  royal  commission  to  investigate,  for  the  two  really  have  very 
much  the  same  effect,  because  the  ministry  is  always  in  accord 
with  the  majority  of  the  House  of  Commons.  It  makes  little 
difference  in  the  practice  in  England.  But  those  commissions 
are  appointed  constantly,  and  their  reports  are  very  interesting 
reading.  I  mean  they  record  all  the  evidence  that  they  take,  and 
they  are  constantly  investigating  the  government.  There  was  a 
very  interesting  report  made  on  the  whole  question  of  civil  service 
in  England,  the  whole  administration,  appointment  of  men,  work 
of  the  department,  and  it  was  very  elaborate.  Then  there  have 
been  recent  reports  on  the  whole  financial  situation,  expenditures, 
and  so  forth.  There  are  two  or  three  on  those  subjects  every  year, 
but  those  are  special  investigations.  I  am  talking  now  of  the  cur- 
rent inquest  that  goes  on  week  in  and  week  out,  all  the  way  through 
every  session.  The  government  is  on  the  grill  all  the  time,  being 
asked  questions  about  something,  and  somebody  is  raising  a  debate, 
and  that  is  the  thing  which  keeps  civil  service  up  to  the  mark. 
With  the  ordinary  bureaucrat,  all  he  knows,  everything  he 
does,  is  Liable  to  be  the  subject  of  investigation  in  Parliament, 
But  if  his  subordinate  makes  a  mistake,  knowing  that  any  aet  he 
does  is  liable  to  be  brought  up  in  debate  in  Parliament  at  any 
time  — 


23  Doc.  No.   14 

Mr.  Deyo. —  With  the  permission  of  the  Chairman.  I  would 
like  to  ask  another  question  at  this  point,  and  that  is  whether 
or  not,  in  your  opinion,  that  feature  of  the  government  could  be 
transplanted  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  You  mean  the  special  commission  ? 

A I  r.  Deyo. —  I  mean  the  grilling. 

Dr.  Lowell. — -Yes;  of  course,  to  do  that  you  must  bring  your 
objector  on  the  floor.  I  do  not  mean  he  has  to  be  a  member  of 
that  House  to  be  there  all  the  time,  but  you  have  to  give  him  a 
chance  to  come  in.  We  do  that  to  some  extent  in  committee,  but 
not  in  the  whole  body.  Of  course,  there  it  is  done  in  the  whole 
body  of  the  House.  I  believe  we  investigate  our  government  a 
great  deal  too  little;  that  we  ought  to  more,  and  that  the  main 
function  of  the  representatives  of  the  people  is  not  merely  to  pass 
law,  but  to  investigate  the  way  in  which  their  government  is 
carried  on.  In  the  first  place,  I  believe  we  have  two  very  grave 
defects  in  our  government,  as  I  see  it,  compared  with  most  gov- 
ernments. One  is  that  we  use  experts  a  great  deal  too  little;  that 
is,  we  run  our  government  by  amateurs,  have  men  who  hold  office 
a  few  years  and  go  out;  instead  of  having  a  trained  corps  of  men 
who  make  a  life  career  of  running  many  of  our  departments  as 
we  ought,  we  run  them  altogether  too  largely  with  amateurs,  and 
in  the  second  place  we  do  not  investigate  our  officers  as  much  as 
they  ought  to  be  investigated.  When  we  do  investigate,  we  investi- 
gate with  hostile  committees  or  commissions,  when  they  should  be 
friendly  investigations.  I  mean  there  should  be  investigations 
asking  about  this  and  that  and  the  other  thing  and  it  should  not 
be  merely  investigations  for  the  purpose  of  attacking  some  person 
in  a  hostile  way.  There  should  not  be  investigations  merely  seek- 
ing some  official's  scalp.  Such  is  not  the  English  method,  but  it 
merely  gives  publicity,  and  it  is  that  sort  of  publicity  which  is 
not  hostile  to  the  individual,  which  we  should  have,  and  of  which 
we  have  too  little. 

We  have  grown,  in  late  years,  very  much  in  our  use  of  experts. 
I  mention  one  which  I  happen  to  know  something  about,  and  that 
is  education.  The  increased  use  of  trained  men,  experts  who 
spend  their  whole  life  in  education,  as  a  superintendent  of  educa- 


Doc.  No.  14  24 

tion.  In  cities,  in  states,  the  practice  is  growing  more  and  more. 
You  have  appointed  within  a  year  or  two,  a  most  admirable  man 
as  Superintendent  of  Education  of  JSTew  York,  Dr.  Finley.  He 
has  devoted  his  whole  life  to  education.  Thirty  years  ago  you 
might  have  put  in  somebody  who  had  been  prominent  in  some 
political  office.  You  certainly  would  sixty  or  seventy  years  ago. 
We  have  improved  enormously,  in  our  use  of  experts  in  certain 
directions.  We  have  always  known  how  to  use  lawyers.  We 
have  never  thought  of  putting  a  casual  layman  on  the  bench,  or 
as  Attorney-General.  We  are  learning  to  use  educators ;  we  are 
learning  to  use  engineers ;  we  ought  to  use  trained  administrators 
in  every  branch  of  our  public  life,  I  believe,  in  a  wTay  in  which 
you  do  not  use  them. 

That  is  the  reason  why  the  corporations  go  'ahead  of  us :  They 
use  experts,  while  the  public  does  not.  I  believe  democracy  needs 
the  best  tools  the  world  has  every  fashioned,  and  the  best  tools  the 
world  has  ever  fashioned  are  the  men  with  the  trained  human 
brain. 

Mr.  Rhees. —  May  I  ask  you  a  question  with  reference  to  the 
function  of  the  auditor  ?  You  say  he  has  to  certify  the  grants 
voted  by  Parliament  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Rhees. —  If  I  remember  correctly,  you  said  that  towards 
the  end  of  the  fiscal  year  the  government  had  to  bring  in  supple- 
mental supply  bills. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Rhees. —  Is  that  supplemental  supply  bill  voted  before  the 
expenditures  under  it  are  made? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  As  a  rule.  There  are  certain  emergency  pro 
visions.  Of  course  you  have  always  latitude,  and  there  are  cer- 
tain small  funds  which  the  government  can  use  in  certain  cases,  in 
case  of  emergency.  I  have  forgotten  the  amount.  They  are  small 
amounts.  You  always  have  to  leave  a  little  leeway  for  margin  of 
one  kind  or  another,  and  the  government  can  call  on  those.  There 
is  always  that  to  give  a  little  easement,  but  that  is  always  made 
up  at  the  end  of  the  year. 


25  Doc.  No.  14 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Before  you  leave  that  subject  which  Mr.  Deyo 
asked  you  about  —  is  this  a  fair  statement  of  the  difference  be- 
tween their  method  of  investigation  of  the  government  and  our 
method  of  investigation,  that  they  do  it  normally  in  a  friendly 
way  in  a  body  whose  regular  daily  duty  it  is  to  keep  in  touch 
with  it  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  While,  on  the  other  hand,  when  we  want  to 
make  an  investigation,  we  appoint  a  special  committee  which  feels 
that  it  is  its  duty  to  find  out  something  wrong,  is  that  it  ? 

I  )r.  Lowell. —  That  is  perfectly  true,  and  their  investigation 
is  more  democratic  than  ours  in  this  sense;  that  it  is  not  done  by 
an  appointed  committee,  but  by  every  member  in  the  House.  Any 
member  in  the  House  can  grill  any  member  of  the  government  he 
wants  to,  and  this  is  constantly  done.  The  case  I  happened  to 
refer  to  of  Gladstone  and  the  cannibals,  it  was  a  member  on  his 
own  side  of  the  House,  sitting  right  close  to  him  on  the  bench, 
who  was  criticizing  the  government.  He  did  not  want  to  upset 
the  government,  but  he  said  that  he  did  think  that  when  English 
sailors  were  going  to  be  eaten,  they  might  cut  out  a  little  of  the 
red  tape,  and  get  there  quicker. 

Mr.  Lincoln. — ■  Is  there  anything  like  their  budget  system  in 
any  State  of  the  United  States? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  I  don't  know  of  any  place  where  there  is  the 
relation  between  the  Executives  and  the  Legislatures  which  makes 
it  really  possible.  The  Executive  might  submit  but  could  not 
carry  it  through,  and  I  know  of  no  place  where  there  is  a  provi- 
sion that  they  shall  not  increase  the  budget ;  and  if  they  can  in- 
crease it,  they  will  make  it  all  over  again. 

.Air.  Stimson. — Are  you  familiar  with  the  provision  that  ex- 
isted in  the  Constitution  of  the  Confederate  States? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  ISTo.  sir. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  There  was  such  a  provision. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  To  what  effect  ? 


Doc.  No.  14  26 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Practically  to  that  effect,  except  that  it  was 
not  an  absolute  provision  against  the  Legislature  making  increases. 
It  was  a  provision  to  the  extent  that  no  increase  could  be  made 
except  by  a  two-thirds  vote. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  I  will  say  that  the  English  provision  has  been 
adopted  in  a  way  in  Australia,  in  New  Zealand  and  in  Canada. 
Those  places  are  quite  as  democratic  as  we  are,  and  they  find  it 
to  work  well.  It  seems  to  work  very  well  there.  In  Trance,  on 
the  other  hand,  it  is  not  a  success.  In  Italy  it  is  not  a  success, 
and  they  have  had  trouble  with  their  budgets.  Appropriations 
do  not  lapse  in  a  year,  and  the  result  is  you  never  know  for  five 
or  six  years  what  the  balance  of  the  year  was,  because  the  ex- 
penditures went  on,  and  then  they  were  continually  moving  to 
increase  the  budget  for  local  purposes,  and  of  course  log-rolling 
and  extravagance  went  on. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  The  absence  of  that  rule  forbidding  increases 
in  the  budget,  as  I  understand  from  reading  your  book,  is  one 
of  the  reasons  why  the  French  government  has  been  more 
extravagant  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes,  and  it  has  found  it  very  hard  to  find  out 
where  the  expenses  have  gone.  In  Italy  and  in  Switzerland  it 
is  the  same. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  I  was  going  to  ask  you  about  Switzerland. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Switzerland,  I  cannot  tell  you  very  well  about 
that.  Switzerland  is  a  peculiarly  arranged  place.  You  must  re- 
member any  examples  taken  from  Switzerland  are  to  be  taken 
with  some  grain  of  salt  as  compared  to  the  application  to  other 
places,  because  Switzerland  is  very,  very  small.  You  will  re- 
member that  the  whole  of  Switzerland  put  together  has  only  about 
twice  the  population  of  Massachusetts,  and  divide  that  into 
twenty-five  cantons,  and  you  will  get  some  rather  minute  places. 
Some  of  the  cantons  are  not  as  big  as  a  single  town  here.  You 
must  remember  also  it  is  a  community  of  very  even  distribution 
of  property,  with  very  indigent  property. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  How  is  it  about  Germany  ? 


27  Doc.  No.  14 

Dr.  Lowell. —  You  must  remember  that  in  Germany  there  is 
no  really  popular  government  at  all.  That  is,  you  have  the 
Eeichstag,  which  is  elected,  but  at  the  same  time  the  Chancellor  is 
not  responsible.  The  budget  there,  of  course,  is  all  prepared  by 
the  executive  government,  by  the  Chancellor  for  the  Kaiser,  and 
is  put  through  the  Reichstag.  The  only  difficulty  they  have  is  that 
once  in  a  while  there  has  been  a  dissolution,  and  the  government 
has  always  won. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  In  answer  to  Mr.  N1  ieoll's  question,  which  you 
answered,  are  you  familiar  with  the  charters  of  several  of  our 
classes  of  cities  in  this  State,  which  provide  a  system  somewhat 
such  as  you  have  exjnained  ?  I  mean  a  budget  presented  by  a 
board  of  estimate  under  the  control  of  the  mayor;  in  our  second 
class  cities,  to  the  board  of  aldermen,  which  the  board  of  aldermen 
is  forbidden  to  raise  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  I  know  nothing  has  prevented  extravagance 
like  that,  there  is  no  doubt  about  that. 

There  is  one  thing  I  would  like  to  point  out,  because  I  think  it 
throws  light  on  the  working  of  the  English  system.  Practically  the 
relation  of  the  English  Cabinet  to  the  House  of  Commons  is  the 
Xew  England  town  meeting.  Almost  exactly,  with  your  cabinet 
as  the  selectmen,  and  those  of  you  who  are  familiar  with  the  Xew 
England  town  meetings,  know  how  they  interrogate  selectmen 
about  as  they  want  to.  Instead  of  meeting  every  day  in  the  week 
for  half  a  year,  they  only  have  two  or  three  town  meetings  a  year. 
But  the  system  is  singularly  like  it.  You  have  there  the  select- 
men, who  are  practically  the  cabinet,  practically  elected  by  the 
town.  Everybody  in  the  town  has  a  right  to  ask  them  any  ques- 
tions they  please.  Practically  the  whole  of  the  expenditures  of 
the  town  are  laid  before  them  at  the  town  meeting;  there  is  no 
rule  that  nobody  can  raise  it,  you  know,  but  it  is  rarely  that  any- 
body does  raise  an  appropriation  against  the  will  of  the  public's 
selectmen.     It  works  pretty  well. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  That  is  the  system  in  Massachusetts  in  local 
legislation '? 

Dr.  Lowell.-     jd  through  ISTew  England. 


Doc.  No.   14  28 

Mr.  Westwood. —  Is  provision  ever  made,  and  if  so  how,  for 
the  reimbursement  of  the  Member  of  Parliament  upon  his  success- 
fully defending  his  right  to  his  seat  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  I  do  not  recall  any  case  of  reimbursing  the  man. 
Perhaps  I  ought  not  say  it  never  happened,  because  it  is  hard  to 
prove  the  universal  negative,  but  those  contests  for  seats  are  made 
before  judicial  bodies,  and  the  fines  are  heavy  to  the  men  who  lose. 

Mr.  Westwood. —  How  would  you  get  into  the  budget  am  item 
for  that  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  The  government  would  not  put  it  in,  and  if  the 
government  would  not  put  it  in,  you  cannot  put  it  in.  I  don't 
think  they  would  pay  those  expenses  at  all.  I  think  they  would 
rather  not. 

Mr.  Stimsok. —  They  do  not  even  pay  salaries  to  their 
members  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  They  do  not. 

Mr.  E.  ~N.  Smith. —  Is  it  necessary  for  this  system  that  the 
Ministers  be  selected  from  the  Parliament? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  We  cannot  adopt  it  just  as  it  stands,  but  there 
is  a  great  deal  in  it  that  we  can  adopt  to  our  institutions. 

Mr.  Parsons. —  How  has  this  system  worked  in  the  self-gov- 
erning colonies? 

Dr.  Lowell.—  The  self-governing  colonies,  I  do  not  think  any 
of  them  work  quite  as  well  as  the  English  system  does,  but  the 
budget  part  I  think  works  pretty  well. 

Mr.  Parsons. —  In  the  self-governing  colonies  the  central  gov- 
ernment does  make  large  appropriations  for  local  purposes  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Undoubtedly  it  does,  and  if  it  were  not  for  this, 
it  would  be,  of  course,  much  worse. 

Mr.  Wadsworth. —  What  is  the  Massachusetts  system  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  It  is  very  much  like  yours.     There  is  no  — 

Mr.  Wadsworth. —  No  improvement  ? 


29  Doc.  No.  14 

Dr.  Lowell. —  There  is  no  great  improvement,  no.  We  have 
a  treasury  and  cuts  are  brought  in  by  the  Committee  of  the  House, 
et  cetera.  We  tried  to  get  a  little  bit  under  the  control  of  a  single 
committee,  but  the  things  work  in  haphazard  sort  of  way,  as  here. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Have  your  State  expenses  increased  in  Massa- 
chusetts ? 

Dr.  Lowell. — ■  Enormously. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  Just  as  much  as  here  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Massachusetts  has  one-  advantage  over  Xew 
York,  which  is  not  an  inconsiderable  one,  and  that  is,  as  the  Legis- 
lature sits  in  Boston,  it  gets  a  great  deal  better  chance  to  hear 
public  opinion,  and  to  get  men  coming  there  constantly,  citizens, 
before  the  committee.  I  merely  state  that  as  one  advantage,  and 
that  is  that  the  Legislature  sits  in  Boston  and  therefore  there  are 
a  great  many  more  appearances  of  citizens  before  the  committees 
at  committee  hearings  than  there  is  in  any  other  Legislature  that 
I  know  of  in  the  United  States,  and  that  is  an  advantage.  Massa- 
chusetts happens  to  be  so  homogeneous  that  that  does  not  have  the 
objections  that  it  would  in  a  great  many  places. 

Mr.  Smrsox. —  One  of  the  other  members  has  asked  me  to  ask 
you  the  exact  way  in  which  the  members  of  the  Cabinet  are  ap- 
pointed in  England,  so  as  to  get  clearly  in  our  minds  the  relation 
of  the  two  that  you  have  spoken  of. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  The  way  by  which  the  Cabinet  officer  is  selected 
is  really  perfectly  informal,  and  sort  of  subterranean,  and  not  a 
little  difficult  to  draft.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  when  a  Cabinet  re- 
signs, and  consequently  when  a  new  Cabinet  begins,  the  King- 
sends  for  what  he  believes  to  be  the  leader  of  the  opposition  of  the 
party  in  power,  the  party  I  mean  that  has  the  majority  in  the 
House,  or  is  going  to  get  the  majority  in  the  House.  That  person 
is  practically  designated  to  him  by  circumstances.  I  mean  to  say 
I  remember  very  well  on  one  occasion  when  the  Queen  sent  for 
Lord  Hartington  instead  of  sending  for  Mr.  Gladstone,  and  Lord 
Hartington  told  her  at  once  that  there  was  only  one  man  who  could 
be  the  head  of  the  Liberal  -Cabinet,  and  that  was  Mr.  Gladstone. 
and  she  then  sent  for  him. 


Doc.  No.  14  30 

That  man  is  usually  designated,  sometimes  not.  When  a  leader 
dies,  for  instance,  if  Mr.  Asquith  should  die  to-day,  he  might  send 
for  Lord  Gray,  or  Lloyd  George,  he  might  have  some  difficulty, 
but  if  the  men  say  no,  we  are  not  the  men  you  want  to  serve  you, 
he  will  go  back,  but  usually  the  leader  is  picked  out,  and  then  he 
goes  and  picks  out  his  colleagues.  He  has  to  arrange  them  as  a 
checkerboard.  Some  of  them  have  got  to  be,  obviously,  in  certain 
l^laces ;  some  are  men  where  you  can  exercise  some  latitude,  some 
what  you  call  the  second  grade  leaders,  but  in  the  main  he  has  to 
take  all  the  leading  men  of  his  party.  He  cannot  leave  any  of 
them  out. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  There  is  one  question  that  does  not  pertain  to 
the  budget,  but  it  pertains  to  a  matter  which  is  pending  before  the 
Convention,  and  has  been  discussed,  and  was  mentioned  I  think 
in  one  of  the  platforms  of  one  of  the  great  parties  last  year;  that 
was  an  improved  method  for  the  treatment  of  private  and  local 
bills.  Could  you  tell  us  a  little  about  the  methods  which  are  em- 
ployed in  the  House  of  Commons  in  dealing  with  that  subject? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  It  is  a  long  chapter.  Local  and  private  bills 
are  treated  the  same  way.  That  is,  a  bill  which  affects  a  corpo- 
ration or  a  town  are  treated  exactly  alike.  The  process  is  to  try 
to  get  it  out  of  politics  as  much  as  may  be.  I  have  always  felt 
that  we  might  get  some  ideas  out  of  that,  but,  again,  you  cannot 
adopt  it  in  the  form  there.  The  procedure  begins  by  filing  a 
notice  of  what  the  bill  is  going  to  be.  In  other  words,  filing  the 
bill  in  the  local  government  office,  local  government  board  office, 
then  it  has  to  be  advertised. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  Who  files  that  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. — ■  It  is  filed  by  the  person  who  wants  it. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Some  one  outside  of  Parliament  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Anybody  outside  of  Parliament  who  wants  to. 
The  petitioner,  as  we  say.  Tf  it  is,  for  instance,  a  railroad  who 
wants  to  be  allowed  to  build  a  spur  track  somewhere,  or  let  us  say 
that  a  town  wants  to  be  allowed  to  supply  gas  to  its  inhabitants 
for  cooking  ranges,  or  something  or  other  —  they  do  supply  all 
kinds  of  things  now.     A  town  wants  to  build  a  bridge  across  a 


31  Doc.  No.   14 

navigable  stream,  or  .anything  else  of  a  local  character,  they  file 
a  bill  in  the  local  office,  and  then  notice  of  the  bill  has  to  be 
published,  given  by  publication  in  the  neighborhood  affected,  and 
by  posting,  etc.  Then  the  examiners  of  the  local  government 
board  go  through  it  to  see  that  all  proper  notices  have  been  given, 
whether  by  publication,  by  posting,  by  giving  personal  notice  to 
the  people  directly  affected,  etc. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Are  those  examiners  local  officers  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  They  are  examiners  of  the  local  government 
board. 

Mr.  Rhees. —  That  is  one  of  the  cabinet  officers  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes,  sir.  Like  many  of  those  boards,  they 
have  an  arrangement  by  which  it  is  a  board,  but  the  board  con- 
sists only  of  its  head.  The  others  are  men  like  the  Secretary  of 
State,  etc.,  but  the  provisions  is  that  the  chairman  on  that  board 
shall  be  necessary  and  sufficient  for  a  quorum.  The  examiners 
examine  that  and  then  the  bill  is  brought  into  Parliament,  either 
to  the  House  of  Commons  or  to  the  LXouse  of  Lords  —  you  may 
begin  either  way  - —  and  they  distribute  it  so  as  to  get  the  hear- 
ings evenly  distributed  through  the  two  houses.  It  is  brought 
into  the  House  of  Commons  and  then  referred  to  a  private  bill 
committee,  and  that  private  bill  committee  consists  of  four  mem- 
bers of  the  house  who  are  selected,  not  because  they  have  an  inter- 
est in  the  bill,  but  because  they  have  not.  That  is,  no  one  who 
has  any  interest  in  that  bill,  or  in  the  locality  which  the  bill 
affects,  is  allowed  to  sit  on  that  committee.  They  sit  in  a  purely 
judicial  way.  The  chairman  of  that  body  is  one  of  the  members 
who  has  been  in  the  habit  of  sitting  on  those  bodies.  In  fact, 
they  have  a  chairman's  panel  from  which  they  draw,  which  con- 
sists of  a  dozen  or  more  who  have  been  in  the  habit  of  sitting  on 
those  bills,  and  some  one  of  those  is  always  chairman  of  those 
private  bill  committees  of  four.  Then  the  private  bill  committee 
sits  and  before  them  appears  the  parties  by  counsel  and  argue 
their  questions,  and  present  evidence  exactly  as  you  would  in  a 

court  of  law,  except  for  the  forms  of  procedure that  is,  the 

examination  of  witnesses,  what  testimony  is  relevant,  etc.  The 
lines  are  a  little  more  strictly  drawn  than  they  are  in  a  court  of 


Doc.  No.  14  32 

law.  The  hearing  is  exactly  as  it  would  be  in  a  court  of  law. 
You  produce  your  witnesses.  Of  course,  in  many  cases,  you  are 
producing  expert  witnesses,  such  as  engineers  to  prove  that  this 
bridge  over  the  river  will  or  will  not  greatly  hurt  the  system,  etc. 
They  have  lawyers  who  appear,  and  those  are  known  as  the  par- 
liamentary bar,  men  who  make  it  their  regular  business ;  and  that 
hearing  lasts  as  long  as  is  necessary,  and  then  the  committee 
reports,  and  their  report  is  practically  always  accepted  by  the 
house.  Then  it  goes  into  the  other  house  and  the  same  procedure 
goes  through  there;  and  I  have  known  very  few  cases  where  the 
report  of  the  committee  was  upset  in  the  House  of  Commons. 
1  remember  one  case  very  well  where  the  committee  reported  that 
a  great  private  company  ought  to  have  the  right  to  sell  electric 
power.  That  would  have  affected  the  town  somewhat,  the  people 
in  which  thought  it  would  interfere  with  their  supply  of  power  to 
their  own  inhabitants  because  this  big  company  could  probably 
supply  it  cheaper,  and  the  boroughs  opposed  it,  and  got  it  voted 
down  in  the  House  of  Commons.  There  was  a  considerable  howl 
through  the  country  that  the  towns  had  no  more  right  to  be  selfish 
than  the  corporations  had. 

Mr.  Stimsox. —  But,  in  general,  the  difference  between  that 
method  of  treating  local  bills  and  ours  is  what  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Those  are  referred  to  a  committee  which  sits 
like  a  court,  whose  members  are  wholly  impartial,  and  hears  evi- 
dence and  tries  the  case  judicially,  and  in  which  the  House  as 
a  whole  practically  takes  no  part. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  And  on  the  other  hand,  we  try  to  prevent  it 
absolutely. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  We  try  to  prevent  it  absolutely. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  And  then  make  it  subject  to  evasion  by  passing 
private  and  local  legislation  in  the  form  of  general  bills  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  There  is  no  European  country  which  does  as 
we  do;  that  is  which  practically  treats  a  private  or  local  mailer 
as  a  public  matter  in  its  parliamentary  body,  permitting  ii  to  be 
debated  and  pushed  about  like  a  football  in  its  public  assemblies. 
In  England  they  do  it  this  way,  but  on  the  Continent  those  things 
are  all  done  by  the  administration. 


33  Doc.  No.   14 

Mr.  Low. —  I  take  it  the  English  method  is  a  very  costly  one  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  The  English  system  is  a  very  costly  one,  and  I 
think  perfectly  unnecessarily  costly,  but  then  that  cost  you  will 
remember  in  the  main  is  just  the  same  thing  for  which  we  spend. 

In  other  words,  if  a  big,  private  concern  wants  a  building  con- 
structed it  will  very  likely  spend  a  great  deal  of  money  to  do  it  in 
one  way  or  the  other. 

A  contest  took  place  between  Manchester  and  Liverpool  on  the 
petition  of  Manchester  to  build  the  Manchester  ship  canal,  the 
legal  expenses  of  which  were  $1,000,000. 

Mr.  Low. —  I  remember  seeing  a  ferryboat  crossing  the  Thames 
years  ago,  and  of  being  told  that  the  reason  they  did  not  have  a 
bridge  was  that  it  would  cost  four  thousand  pounds  to  get  per- 
mission from  Parliament,  and  it  was  cheaper  to  maintain  the 
ferry. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  That,  of  course,  is  unnecessary. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  You  mean  that  the  system  of  treating  those 
matters  judicially  is  right,  but  the  cost  attached  to  it  is  not,  and 
could  be  transplanted  more  economically  if  the  people  wished  to 
do  it? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  That  is  it  exactly. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  As  I  understand  it,  the  budget  is  prepared  by 
the  cabinet,  substantially  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. Substantially. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  The  House  of  Commons  merely  has  the  veto 
power  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes.  It  can  reduce  or  strike  out  items,  but  it 
cannot  increase  them. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  They  are  not  increased  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  The  cabinet  is  appointed  by  the  King  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  So  the  King  originates  the  budget? 


Doc.  No.  14  34 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Well,  that,  perhaps,  is  not  really  a  fair  way 
to  put  it. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  I  want  to  be  fair. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  When  somebody  said  to  me  that  the  King  was 
the  fountain  of  justice,  I  said  yes. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  In  our  country  the  budget  originates,  for  in- 
stance, in  Congress,  in  the  lower  House. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  And  in  our  State  in  the  lower  House  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  In  Massachusetts  the  same  way  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  Do  you  want  to  make  any  comment  on  that 
situation  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  My  feeling  is  simply  this,  that  the  budget  is 
a  public  matter.  It  is  not  a  collection  of  private  matters.  It  is  a 
public  matter,  therefore,  it  would  be  wiser  to  have  it  originate 
by  public  officials  and  not  by  a  lot  of  people  who  represent  private 
and  local  interests.  That  is  really  the  argument  I  wish  to  make 
upon  it,  that  what  the  public  wants  is  somebody  who  represents 
the  public.  As  a  friend  of  mine  said  once,  and  I  think  there  is 
some  truth  in  it,  and  I  think  it  explains  a  great  deal  of  the  move- 
ments in  our  government,  that  the  characteristic  defect  of  democ- 
racy is  that  there  is  nobody  whose  business  it  is  to  represent  the 
public,  and  to  some  extent  that  is  true.  That  is,  people  represent 
fractions  of  the  public.  The  reason  for  having  our  budget  origi- 
nate in  our  State  with  the  Governor  is  that  he  is  the  one  official 
who  represents  the  whole  public,  whereas,  the  members  of  the 
House  are,  in  each  instance,  representing  small  sections  of  the 
public,  therefore,  as  a  body,  their  combined  good  sense  is  very 
well,  but  if  you  give  each  of  them  a  chance  to  originate  I  lie  budget, 
you  are  put  ling  that  in  the  hands  of  a  lot  of  people  who  represent 
individual  interests  and  not  the  public  interests.  \  believe  myself 
that  the  reason  that  the  power  of  the  Governor  and  the  President 


35  Doc.  No.  14 

etc.,  lias  increased  so  much  in  the  last  fifty  years  is  because  they 
come  nearer  representing  the  public  than  a  representative  assembly 
does.  If  you  can  get  the  representative  assembly  to  work  as  a 
whole,  or  representing  all  the  public,  on  questions  affecting  the 
whole  country,  that  would  be  admirable,  but  when  you  get  them 
looking  at  points  which  affect  fractions  of  the  public  they  cease 
to  represent  the  public  and  they  only  represent  a  lot  of  scattered 
interests. 

Mr.  CuLLiNAisr. —  Our  Legislature  and  our  'Congress  impose  the 
tax. 

Dr.  Lowell. — ■  Yes. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  Ought  they  not  to  say  something,  or  have 
something  to  say  about  how  that  tax  should  be  appropriated  in 
the  different  phases  of  governmental  activities  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Perfectly  so,  and  they  do.  That  is,  if  your 
government  proposes  an  appropriation  which  they  do  not  like,  they 
ought  to  have  the  right  to  reject  it.  In  other  words,  there  is  no 
doubt  they  ought  to  have  the  right  to  refuse  to  vote  any  tax  which 
they  do  not  believe  to  be  right  or  do  not  favor,  but  that  is  a  very 
different  thing  from  giving  individual  members  the  right  to  pro- 
pose an  expenditure  which  a  man  may  think  in  the  interests  of 
the  whole  public,  when  in  fact  it  is  not. 

Mr.  Culllstan. —  You  would  eliminate  the  log-rolling  feature  ?• 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes,  sir,  I  would  eliminate  the  log-rolling 
features.  As  it  is  now  we  have  said  that  each  individual  member 
shall  have  the  right  to  initiate,  but  the  Governor  may  veto.  I 
think  the  Governor  should  initiate  and  the  Legislature  should 
veto,  so  far  as  appropriations  are  concerned. 

Mr.  E.  N.  Smith. —  What  is  the  life  of  the  ministry  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Of  the  ministry  ? 

Mr.  E.  N.  Smith. —  Yes. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  It  has  varied,  of  course,  a  good  deal,  from  time 
to  time.     Assuming  that  this  ministry   is  now  terminated,  be- 


Doc.  No.  14  36 

cause  they  have  made  a  coalition,  it  has  lasted  since  1906.     You 
do  not  mean  practically  the  same  body  running  through  ? 

Mr.  E.  X.  Smith.—  No. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  This  ministry  came  in  in  1906;  it  was  in  nine 
years.  The  one  before  1906  came  in  in  1895  and  consequently 
was  in  eleven  years.  Latterly,  they  have  been  averaging  eight  or 
ten  years. 

Mr.  E.  N.  Smith. —  I  was  asking  that  question  as  related  to 
the  fact  that  we  elect  our  Governor  for  two  years.  How  would 
that  plan  operate  in  connection  with  the  financial  system,  like  that 
in  England  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  I  have  no  question,  sir,  that  the  shorter  term 
that  we  have  for  all  of  our  officers  makes  government  more  diffi- 
cult. We  have  a  curious  habit  in  Massachusetts ;  we  elect  there  a 
governor  every  year,  but  we  always  re-elect  them  two  terms,  making 
it  a  three-yen r  term,  unless  we  have  some  special  reason  for  not 
re-electing  him.  It  is  understood  he  is  not  there  for  three  years, 
but  he  has  the  right  of  nomination,  and  is  habitually  re-elected. 
We  are  shifting  a  little  now. 

Mr.  Sanders. —  If  the  English  budget  were  adopted  in  New 
York  State  how  would  it  be  changed,  in  case  the  executive  affairs 
are  in  the  control  of  one  party  and  the  Legislative  affairs  are  in 
control  of  the  other  party? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Of  course,  that  raises  a  different  proposition 
from  that  which  exists  in  England,  where  they  must  be  of  the 
same  party.  Although  it  probably  would  not  work  as  well  as  if 
the  Governor  and  Legislature  were  of  the  same  party,  still  I  do 
not  think  it  would  produce  a  deadlock ;  but,  if  it  did,  you  would 
have  to  take  some  method  by  which  you  can  get  over  a  deadlock. 
There  are  a  great  many  different  ways  in  which  you  can  get  over 
a  deadlock. 

Mr,  Stimson. —  Are  you  familiar  with  the  way  which  has  been 
in  effect  where  some  of  our  insular  governments  are  established  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes.  But  we  would  not  want  to  do  that,  the 
budget  would  be  continued  until  the  next  election.     My  impres- 


37  Doc.  No.  14 

sion  is  that  you  will  find  in  most  cases  that  a  deadlock  will  not 
arise.  Even  in  the  State  of  New  York  I  happen  to  have  taken 
statistics  of  those  some  years  ago.  The  proportion  of  matters  that 
are  carried  by  purely  party  votes  in  the  Legislature  is  much  less 
than  it  is  in  the  House  of  Commons. 

Mr.  Sandees. —  You  think  the  friction  would  not  be  any 
greater  than  it  is  at  the  present? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  I  think  the  friction  would  not  be  any  greater 
than  it  is  at  present. 

Mr.  Deyo. —  I  don't  see  how  there  could  be  any  deadlock,  but 
I  can  see  how  the  grilling  would  be  decidedly  adverse  grilling. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  I  don't  think  that  would  be  objectionable. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  The  grilling  in  the  House  of  Commons  is  by 
the  opponents  of  the  government. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  I  do  not  object  to  that,  but  if  the  Governor  pre- 
sented the  budget,  and  the  House  refused  to  accept  it,  and  there 
were  not  any  power  to  initiate  any  budget  of  their  own,  there 
might  be  a  deadlock. 

Mr.  Low. —  Would  you  propose  that  that  should  be  avoided, 
and  how  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  I  could  invent  various  ways  of  getting  rid  of 
that.  Of  course,  if  worse  came  to  worse  we  could  have  a  re- 
election of  either  the  Governor  or  the  House,  if  the  term  ran  for 
some  time.  You  could  provide  a  certain  minimum  of  expendi- 
tures in  some  way,  but  if  you  shake  the  people  up  in  a  box  they 
would  generally  agree  because  neither  party  would  want  to  keep 
the  State  of  New  York  without  expenditures. 

Mr.  Fbaxchot. —  If  I  understand  you.  the  ministers  are  re- 
sponsible to  the  cabinet,  and  to  the  people  only  through  the 
medium  of  the  House  of  Commons  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. — ■  Yes. 

Mr.  Feaxchot.- —  What  would  you  say  would  be  the  effect  of 
having  them  directly  responsible  to  the  people,  not  through  the 
legislative  branch  ? 


Doc.  No.   14  38 

Dr.  Lowell. —  It  would  make  a  good  deal  of  difference,  of 
course,  in  the  operation  of  things,  and  it  is  for  that  reason  that  you 
cannot  adopt  their  scheme  as  it  stands  here.  You  have  got  to 
adapt  it  to  that  very  condition,  and  our  exxecutive  is  not  re- 
sponsible to  the  Legislature,  but  to  the  people.  That  would  make 
you  modify  the  scheme,  but  still  I  think  there  are  many  points  in 
it  that  could  be  adapted  to  that  condition. 

Mr.  Hale. —  What  control  has  the  House  of  Lords  over  the 
budget  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  The  House  of  Commons  has  always  contended 
that  the  House  of  Lords  had  no  right  to  change  the  budget  in  any 
way,  no  right  to  increase  or  diminish  it,  but  must  accept  it  or  re- 
ject it  as  a  whole.  The  House  of  Lords  never  admitted  that,  but 
they  never  ventured  to  exercise  any  such  disputed  power.  It  has 
been  usually  admitted  that  they  had  a  right  to  reject  it,  but  a 
little  while  ago  they  did  reject  it,  and  I  fancy  they  will  never 
again. 

Mr.  Hale.—  That  was  in  1911  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  They  rejected  it,  and  the  election  w>as  so  de- 
cidedly a  condemnation  of  the  way  they  did  it,  that  I  do  not  think 
that  it  is  likely  to  be  attempted  again.  Practically  they  have  no 
financial  power. 

Mr.  Hale. —  I  happened  to  be  in  London  that  time. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Hale. —  I  understood  the  King  agreed,  if  necessary,  to 
appoint  seventy-six  additional  peers. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  He  did.  He  was  ready  to  swamp  the  House  of 
Lords.    They  have  no  powers  in  financial  matters  practically. 

Mr.  Hale.—  What  effect  would  that  have  upon  the  proposition 
to  have  a  Legislature  of  a  single  house? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  I  suppose  you  could  apply  this  either  to  the  two 
Houses  or  to  one.  I  think  it  would  be  possible  to  apply  it  to  either. 
Of  course  it  is  a  great  deal  easier  to  work  in  a  government  the 
simpler  it  is ;  it  is  simpler  to  work  a  government  with  one  House 


39  Doc.  No.   14 

than  with  two ;  but  it  does  not  always  follow  that  the  simpler  form 
of  government,  which  is  the  easiest  to  work,  is  always  the  best. 
Good  results  usually  come  from  more  or  less  friction.  If  a  thing 
works  too  easily  it  does  not  always  work  best.  The  very  fact  that 
you  have  two  Houses,  and  consequently  some  attrition  between 
them,  it  may  be  good,  or  it  may  not.  It  does  not  follow  that  any 
system  of  administration  which  is  the  easiest  is  the  best.  I  think 
you  could  work  with  two  Houses  or  one.  Of  course  it  would  work 
easier  with  one.  But  as  it  is  now  either  House  can  put  up  or  down 
any  appropriation.  They  must  both  agree.  If  they  could  not  put 
it  up,  it  would  make  the  agreement  between  the  two  Houses  so 
much  easier  to  reach,  particularly  as  experience  in  England  goes, 
they  are  very  rarely  cut  down. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  Doctor,  if  you  were  through  with  the  budget 
feature,  the  Committee  on  the  Governor  and  other  State  Officers, 
etc.,  have  been  taking  up  the  question  of  the  readjustment  of  the 
State  Executive's  functions.  We  have  found  that  there  is  a  great 
mass  of  departments  and  commissions,  about  150  or  160.  I  don't 
know  how  far  by  analogy  we  can  get  anything  from  the  executive 
system  of  England,  but  I  am  sure  the  Committee  on  Governor 
and  other  State  Officers,  etc.,  would  like  to  hear  what  the  division 
of  executive  departments  in  England  is.  If  you  will  take  that 
line  up  and  pursue  the  same  method  of  permitting  questions  as 
you  go  along,  I  think  it  will  be  of  great  advantage  to  the  Com- 
mittee. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  The  English  system  is  a  system  of  departments 
with  single  ministers  at  the  head  of  them. 

Mr.  Tanner. —  In  the  first  place  the  executive  is  not,  as  in  this 
country ;  it  is  in  the  Cabinet  entirely. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  It  is  in  the  Cabinet  entirely.  Of  course  nom- 
inally it  is  in  the  Crown,  and,  as  you  know  perfectly  well,  every- 
thing is  done  in  the  name  of  the  Crown,  but  practically  every- 
body, all  the  ministers  practically,  have  rubber  stamps  for  signing 
the  name  of  the  Crown.  The  Crown  is  a  little  more  than  a  rubber 
stamp  so  far  as  the  ordinary  executive  government  is  concerned. 
Everything  is  in  his  name,  in  the  name  of  the  Crown,  but  it  is 
done  by  the  ministers.     The  general  organization,  in  fact,  is  very 


Doc.  No.  14  40 

much  alike  in  most  of  the  departments.  The  names  and  forms 
are  so  wholly  different  that  if  you  will  come  to  read  them  through 
you  would  suppose  them  to  be  some  heterogeneous  group.  But 
you  know  the  whole  English  system  of  government  is  a  bundle 
of  shams,  and  nobody  in  England  ever  does  what  he  would  seem 
supposed  to  do  by  the  title.  They  always  do  something  different. 
The  Crown  does  not  govern.  There  is  a  Chancellor  of  the  Ex- 
chequer, and  he  is  not  a  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  no  such 
thing  as  the  Exchequer  exists.  There  is  a  Treasury,  and  it  has 
nothing  to  do  with  the  thing  as  Treasury.  The  names  are  simply 
outgrown.  We  are  working  with  old  forms  and  old  names,  with 
wholly  new  substance  put  into  them,  consequently  one  must  not  be 
misled  by  that,  Nominally  those  offices  are  boards,  a  groat  many 
of  them.  But,  as  I  was  just  now  saying,  the  Chairman  of  the 
Board  is  necessary  and  sufficient  for  a  quorum  and  nobody  does 
ever  attend.  I  remember  when  one  of  the  last  boards  "was  formed, 
I  think  it  was  the  Local  Government  Board,  Lord  Hartington  who 
was  a  singularly  honest  man,  was  asked  a  question  in  the  House 
of  Lords  why  they  should  have  a  board,  because  that  was  much 
less  convenient  than  a  single  head  to  the  ministry,  and  Lord  Hart- 
ington said,  "  I  cannot  really  remember  why  a  decision  was  made 
in  favor  of  the  form  of  the  board,  but  it  is  perfectly  well  under- 
stood that  really  there  will  be  no  board."  He  is  the  Chairman  of 
the  Board  of  Works,  and  I  think  he  is  really  the  minister.  You 
have  noticed  that  now  you  hear  of  the  First  Lord  of  the  Admiralty, 
but  he  is  the  whole  admiralty.  The  fact  is  there  was  a  man  called 
Lord  High  Admiral,  and  they  put  that  into  a  commission  as  it 
was  called,  and  made  a  board  to  exercise  the  functions  of  the  Lord 
High  Admiral,  and  now  the  president  of  that  board  is  the  whole 
thing,  and  they  might  just  as  well  call  him  the  Lord  High  Ad- 
miral, but  they  do  not.  For  some  reason  they  prefer  not  to,  and 
there  are  a  lot  of  curious  forms  in  that  way,  but  practically  each 
department  has  a  minister  at  its  head,  and  that  minister  is  a  Mem- 
ber of  Parliament. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  The  First  Lord  High  Admiral  is  the  navy  \ 

Dr.    Lowell. —  That  is  the  navy.      Then   there  is   the    local 
government  board,  the  Secretaries  of  State  for  the  Interior. 


41  Doc.  No.  14 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Would  you  mind  explaining  what  each  one  is  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  I  will.  Of  course,  the  Foreign  Affairs  you 
understand  perfectly ;  and  the  War  Department  —  you  under- 
stand that  —  and  the  Navy.  They  are  just  the  same  in  all  coun- 
tries. Then  there  is  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  the  Chan- 
cellor who  is  simply  the  Secretary  of  State  for  the  Treasury  — 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  practically.  Then  there  is  the  Attor- 
ney-General;  that  does  not  require  any  explanation.  That  is  the 
same  with  us,  practically.  Then  there  is  the  Board  of  Trade. 
The  Board  of  Trade  is  practically  the  Ministers  of  Commerce  — 
what  we  call  the  Secretary  of  Commerce.  Then  there  is  the  local 
government  board,  which  has  the  government  of  local  affairs. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  As  our  Secretary  of  Interior  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  No.  They  have  a  Secretary  of  the  Interior. 
Our  Secretary  of  the  Interior  is  more  than  local  affairs.  They 
call  their  Secretary  of  the  Interior  the  Home  Secretary,  but  the 
local  government  board  is  the  man  who  has  supervision  of  all 
local  authorities,  towns,  counties,  etc.,  whereas  the  Home  Secre- 
tary has  the  care  of  the  poor,  and  many  other  things. 

Mr.  Low. —  Has  it  any  relation  to  cities  —  any  relation  to  the 
debt-making  power  of  cities  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Entirely  so.  That  is  one  officer  that  does. 
Practically  no  city  can  increase  its  debt  without  the  consent  of 
that  board.  The  board  has  very  close  supervision.  Sometimes  I 
notice  when  you  talk  to  members  of  the  board  they  say  super- 
vision is  most  admirable,  but  when  you  talk  to  the  local  people, 
they  say  it  is  a  little  bit  paternal. 

Mr.  Lincoln. —  Have  any  of  our  States  a  counterpart  to  the 
local  government  board? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes.  Usually  divided  up  among  different  in- 
stitutions. Then,  as  I  say,  there  is  a  Home  Department,  which 
has  what  is  left  after  you  have  given  things  to  other  people.  The 
Home  Secretary  is  one  of  the  departments  from  which  they  have 
carved  out  a  lot  of  departments,  and  left  a  lot  of  miscellaneous 
things,  such  as  paupers,  lunatics,  and  personal  affairs  of  the  King, 


Doc.  No.  14  42 

and  such.  Then  there  is  the  Education  Department.  Then  there 
is  a  Special  Secretary  for  Ireland,  and  a  Special  Secretary  for 
Scotland.  Then  there  is  the  Board  of  Works,  which  has  charge 
of  the  public  works  belonging  to  the  government  —  I  mean  the 
government  buildings  all  over  the  country.  Then,  of  course, 
there  is  the  post-office.  The  post-office,  curiously  enough,  is  under 
the  Post-office  Department,  in  the  main. 

Mr.  Rhees. —  Is  each  minister  a  member  of  the  Cabinet  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  No.  The  members  of  the  Cabinet  are  all  minis- 
ters, and  the  most  important  of  those  ministers  are  always  in  the 
Cabinet.  For  instance,  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer,  the 
Premier,  who  may  not  have  any  office  at  all,  and  the  Secretaries 
for  War  or  the  First  Lord  of  the  Admiralty,  etc.,  those  are  always 
in  the  Cabinet.  A  president  of  the  Board  of  Works  may  or  may 
not  be.  Outside  of  the  Cabinet  comes  the  Ministry,  and  the 
Cabinet  is  the  smaller  body. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  What  determines  what  positions  shall  be  in  the 
Cabinet  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Two  factors ;  one  is  the  question  of  the  im- 
portance of  the  department.  The  Foreign  Secretary  must  be 
there.  On  the  other  hand,  a  big  man  in  a  small  place  would 
be  put  in. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  You  indicate  that  at  one  time  a  man  holding 
one  office  may  be  in  the  Cabinet,  but  at  another  time  a  man  hold- 
ing that  same  office  may  not  be  in  there  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  Who  determines  that  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  The  Prime  Minister.  For  instance,  Winston 
Churchill  has  just  got  out  of  the  Admiralty  because  it  was  thought 
it  was  not  being  well  managed,  and  yet  he  was  not  wanted  to 
have  a  back  seat,  so  he  is  given  another  seat.  Nominally,  his 
department  has  charge  of  the  little  revenues  belonging  to  the 
Crown  in  the  Duchy  of  Lancashire.  It  is  really  a  small  office, 
but  it  is  in  charge  of  a  big  man.  They  put  him  in  the  Cabinet 
because  they  want  him  in  the  Cabinet,  but  another  man  to  hold 


43  Doc.  No.   14 

that  office  would  not  be.  He  is  always  in  the  Ministry.  The 
Ministry  means  all  the  men  who  resign  when  the  Cabinet  goes  out. 
There  is  a  very  sharp  line  in  England  between  what  are  called 
political  an<l  the  permanent  civil  service.  All  those  men  who  go 
out  of  office  when  there  is  a  change  of  Ministry  are  called  min- 
isters and,  therefore,  there  are  about  twenty-six  or  twenty-seven 
of  them. 

Mr.  Stimsobt. —  Twenty-six  or  twenty-seven  of  them  '. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes.  But  if  you  count  the  officers  of  the 
household,  they  run  up  to  about  forty. 

Mr.  Low. —  What  is  the  size  of  the  Cabinet  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Nowadays  it  runs  up  to  nineteen  or  twenty  — 
larger  than  before.     I  should  say  the  ministers  run  over  thirty. 

Mr.  Low. —  But  the  Cabinet  members  are  all  ministers. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Low. —  But  the  ministers  are  not  all  in  the  Cabinet  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  No ;  because  there  are  a  great  many  of  those 
departments  which  have  political  under  secretaries  and  change 
with  the  'Cabinet,  but  are  not  in  it.  There  is  a  Secretary  for  War 
and  an  Under  Secretary  for  War.  There  are  about  forty  go  out 
with  the  ministers.  Everybody  else  is  in  the  permanent  civil 
service.  The  departments  are  all  practically  organized  on  that 
same  principle.  Whatever  the  name  may  be,  you  have  practically 
got  at  the  head  of  them  one  man  who  is  a  member  of  the  ministry. 
Whether  in  the  department  or  not  will  depend  partly  on  his  own 
importance  and  partly  on  the  importance  of  his  office ;  and  he 
goes  out.  of  course,  when  the  Cabinet  changes. 

Mr.  Fkaxoiiot. —  To  whom  is  he  responsible? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  The  ministers  stand  together.  It  would  be  a 
case,  if  we  do  not  all  hang  together,  we  will  hang  separately.  They 
must  stand  together. 

Lord  Melbourne,  it  is  said,  when  they  had  been  having  a 
discussion  about  the  price  of  grain,  he  is  said  to  have  put  his 
back  against  the  door,  and  when  the  meeting  was  about  to  break 


Doc.  No.   14  44 

up  lie  sail!.  '  Xow.  raise  the  price  of  the  bread  or  lower  it;  "it 
does  not  make  any  difference  whal  we  say,  but  we  have  all  got 
to  say  the  same  thing." 

They  may  have  very  bitter  fights  in  the  Cabinet,  but  unless  it 
is  so  bitter  that  they  have  to  resign  and  get  out,  they  must  act 
together,  because  if  they  do  not  they  must  get  out. 

Mr.  Pelletreau. —  Does  Parliament  have  any  power  of  con- 
firmation of  the  appointment  of  the  minister  ? 

Dr.  Lowell.  — They  have  absolute  power,  not  of  the 
individuals. 

Mr.  Pelletreau. —  But  as  a  body  ? 

Dr.  Lowell.— As  a  body.  The  first  thing  that  is  done  is  this: 
suppose  a  liberal  cabinet  resigns  and  a  conservative  comes  in  —  or 
take  what  actually  happened  the  last  time  there  was  a  change  of 
Parliament.  Balfour  resigned.  Campbell-Bannermaii  was  ap- 
pointed. What  did  he  do?  He  knew  perfectly  veil  that  that 
House  was  hostile  to  him.  He  dissolved  it.  and,  as  he  had  a  right 
to,  went  to  the  country  and  got  a  new  election.  The  point  there 
is  that  the  opposition  puts  down  practically  a  motion  for  want 
of  confidence  in  the  ministers.  Tf  that  is  carried  the  ministers 
resign  at  once,  and  practically  it  is  an  understood  thing  in  Eng- 
land that  at  any  moment  the  opposition  choose  to  ask  it,  that  may 
happen. 

Mr.  Wadsworth. —  From  your  knowledge  of  our  general  State 
governments,  do  you  think  it  practical  to  have  an  official  who 
would  practically  correspond  to  the  English  Chancellor  of  the 
Exchequer,  who  would  make  his  estimates  to  the  Legislature,  etc.  \ 

Dr.  Lowell. —  I  think  you  have  got  to  do  that.  But  if  you 
do  that  I  think  you  would  have  an  officer  who  would  speak  in  the 
name  of  the  Governor. 

Mr.  Wadsworth. —  A  man  appointed  by  the  Governor  \ 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes,  and  responsible  to  the  Governor.  Just  as 
the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  going  into  the  House  of  Commons 
would  not  be  able  to  speak  as  he  does  if  he  had  not  the  Premier 
and  whole  cabinet  behind  him. 


45  Doc.    No.    H 

Mr.  Pelletreau. —  I  would  like  to  ask  the  same  question  as 
to  the  auditor  \ 

Dr.  Lowell.- —  I  think  your  auditor  must  be  indqoendent. 
Your  auditor  has  to  be  a  man  who  is  wholly  independent.  I 
remember  a  case  which  I  could  tell  you  about  that  I  came  across 
in  business  myself  when  I  was  a  comparatively  young  man. 

It  so  happened  that  the  auditor,  who  had  been  employed  by  the 
treasurer  of  a  cotton  mill  came  in  to  a  member  of  the  committee 
of  the  stockholders  on  auditing-  the  accounts  and  said  to  him, 
"  The  treasurer  has  been  stealing,  i  thought  I  was  employed 
by  him  to  look  after  his  subordinates,  but  T  have  learned  that  I 
was  employed  by  the  stockholders  to  report  to  them,  and  T  report 
that  the  treasurer  has  been  stealing." 

This  is  not  a  case  where  we  are  seeking  for  fraud,  but  seeking 
for  irregularity.  But,  in  any  case,  your  auditor  ought  to  be 
appointed  clearly ;  he  ought  to  owe  his  appointment  to  a  party 
outside. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  And  his  duties  ought  not,  therefore,  to  be 
mixed  up  with  executive  duties  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Not  in  the  least.  He  is  to  inspect,  and  he  ought 
to  have  no  other  duties,  because  otherwise  he  is  investigating 
himself. 

Mr.  Pelletreau. —  Should  not  he  be  appointed  by  the 
Governor  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  I  should  feel  it  would  be  a  pity  to  mix  up 
your  auditor  with  your  executives  in  any  way.  You  do  not  want 
to  mix  those  things  together. 

Mr.  Wagner. —  You  have  got  to  put  the  appointive  [tower 
somewhere. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Certainly,  but  it  ought  to  be  outside  of  the 
executive.  You  may  put  it  in  your  House,  you  may  elect  him, 
put  him  anywhere,  but  not  in  the  hands  of  your  executives.  The 
probability  is  the  best  place  to  put  him  is  in  the  Legislature;  but, 
whatever  you  do,  you  do  not  want  to  put  him  in  the  executive, 
and  yon  do  not  want  to  give  him  executive  power. 


Doc.  No.   14  46 

Mr.  Stimson. —  And  you  do  not  want  to  put  him  in  a  position 
where  he  would  be  criticizing  himself. 

Dr.  Lowtell. —  No. 

Mr.  Parmenter. —  Does  the  minister  represent  the  locality  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  He  represents  Bristol,  but  he  practically  has 
nothing  to  do  with  Bristol,  as  a  matter  of  fact. 

Mr.  Franchot. —  Who  looks  after  the  local  interests  of 
Bristol  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  That  is  the  point.  The  theory  of  the  House  of 
Commons  is  that  the  local  interests  have  no  business  there.  That 
is  the  theory.  There  are  two  theories  of  representation ;  one  is, 
that  every  man  that  represents  a  constituency,  and  that  the  aggre- 
gate of  separate  interests  is  the  interest  of  the  community.  The 
other  theory  is  that  every  member  of  the  Legislature  represents 
the  people  as  a  whole. 

Mr.  Stimson. —  They  have  other  methods  by  which  Bristol  is 
taken  care  of  in  a  local  assembly  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Certainly,  but  I  feel  that  a  man  ought  to  repre- 
sent the  whole  community. 

Mr.  Franchot. —  The  system  where  he  is  elected  from  a  par- 
ticular district,  the  tendency  is  the  other  way  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  To  some  extent.  Do  you  know  any  man  who 
would  stand  up  in  Congress  and  say  the  interests  of  the  United 
States  are  so  and  so  and  the  interests  of  the  State  are  so  and  so, 
but  we  are  going  to  vote  against  the  United  States  ? 

The  Chairman. —  They  do  not  say  that,  but  they  do  it. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  But  nobody  will  admit  it;  which  seems  to  show 
that  a  man  feels  he  should  represent  the  interests  as  a  whole. 

Mr.  Wagner. —  Would  not  the  giving  of  increased  power  to 
the  municipal  corporation  relieve  the  Legislature  from  ;i  good 
deal  <>f  local  matter? 

Dr.  Lowell.— r  Very  much. 


47  Doc.    NTo.    ii 

The  Chairman. —  That  is  one  of  the  questions  that  is  before 
this  Convention. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Undoubtedly. 

The  Chaiemaw. —  To  try  to  get  the  local  authorities  of  the 
counties  and  the  towns  and  states  to  assume  a  large  number  of 
functions  and  be  compelled  to  assume  them,  which  are  now  done 
bv  the  Legislature. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Exactly. 

The  Chairman. —  That,  in  your  opinion,  would  be  a  marked 
progress  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. — ■  Oh,  decidedly  so. 

Mr.  Fkanchot. —  Could  we  ask  Dr.  Lowell,  although  it  is  not 
within  the  business  of  this  Committee,  to  tell  us  what  Massa- 
chusetts does  in  that  regard  ( 

Dr.  Lowell.- —  We  do  the  same  thing  as  you  do.  Any  amount 
of  local  bills.  It  is  the  curse  of  the  Legislature.  I  think  we  have 
a  pretty  good  Legislature,  but  that  is  the  defect. 

Mr.  Franchot.- —  You  do  not  have  any  system  of  home  rule 
in  the  cities  then  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Very  little. 

Mr.  Parsons. —  Have  the  self-governing  colonies  adopted  the 
English  system  in  regard  to  local  bills? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  I  don't  know.  Canada,  we  know,  has  a  great 
deal  of  local  work. 

Mr.  Lincoln. —  In  connection  with  the  accruing  of  new  activi- 
ties about  the  government  and  new  bureaus,  are  those  invariably 
subordinate  to  some  existing  department? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  No.  The  Board  of  Works  was  a  new  depart- 
ment. Every  little  while  they  create  a  new  board,  but  it  is  al- 
ways the  same  thing,  it  is  always  really  a  menace. 

The  Chairman. —  But  I  suppose  that  is  only  when  the  govern- 
ment goes  into  a  new  activity  ? 


Doc.  No.   14  48 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Yes,  sir ;  usually  the  activities  of  government 
grow  slowly,  and  they  will  be  put  into  some  other  department 
until  they  get  big,  and  then  they  will  split  them  up. 

Mr.  Lincoln. —  Mr.  Tanner  explained  there  are  some  150 
bureaus,  all  independent. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  I  know. 

Mr.  Lincoln. —  I  wonder  if  they  had  any  such  curse,  if  it  is 
a  curse  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  No ;  they  are  carefully  grouped  under  single 
ministers.  A  new  bureau  may  be  added  to  a  department,  but  al- 
ways under  that  head,  and  every  department  is  represented  in  the 
ministry  and  the  House  of  Commons. 

Mr.  Rhees. —  But  not  by  a  new  minister  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  No.  But  there  are  some  ministers  in  the  House 
of  Commons  to  whom  every  bureau  chief  can  go  and  say,  "  We 
represent  our  department.  Don't  yon  want  to  answer  this  ques- 
tion ?  Or  don't  you  want  to  bring  out  this  fact  ?  Or  don't  you 
want  to  introduce  this  bill  ?  " 

Mr.  Deyo. —  Is  there  any  minister  who  represents  labor  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  The  labor  interests  come  under  the  Board  of 
Trade. 

Chairman  Tanner. —  Are  there  any  further  questions,  gentle- 
men? 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  Just  one  question.  Doctor.  Do  you  want  to 
say  anything  in  reference  to  the  fidelity  in  the  discharge  of  his 
duties  by  a  public  officer  depending  upon  whether  he  is  an  ap- 
pointee or  elected  by  the  people? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  Well,  I  don't  know  that  I  could  say  anything 
that  would  be  of  any  value  in  regard  to  fidelity.  I  can  say  some- 
thing in  regard  to  the  kind  of  officer  who  would  naturally  be 
chosen  by  one  method  or  the  other.  My  own  experience  is  in 
watching  things,  and  also  in  studying  government,  that  it  is  true 
that  the  public  can  estimate  certain  qualities  very  well,  but  not 


4'J  Doc.    No.    14 

other  qualities  as  well.  That,  for  instance,  of  the  selection  of  an 
expert  is  a  very,  very  difficult  thing  to  do,  and  impossible  to  be 
done  by  the  public.  It  is  my  business  to  select  experts  in  life  to- 
day, and  I  know  it  is  the  most  difficult  thing  to  do.  I  can  select  a 
good  man  for  the  Legislature  very  well,  because  those  are  ques- 
tions of  general  integrity  and  of  general  intelligence,  but  when 
you  come  to  select  an  expert  you  are  required  to  ask  the  advice  of 
a  great  many  people,  and  make  a  very  careful  inquiry,  and,  there- 
fore, it  is  that  the  selection  of  experts  is  a  very  difficult  thing  to 
do  for  the  public,  and  difficult  for  the  Governor.  It  requires  very 
great  inquiry,  and  from  people  who  know,  and  have  the  ability  of 
finding  out  people  who  do  know. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  Exclude  experts. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  I  mention  all  men  who  are  performing  any 
function  requiring  expert  knowledge  or  training.  You  must  not 
overburden  the  people  with  many  names.  The  public  will  make 
a  very  wise  choice  of  a  few  men,  but  not  of  a  great  many.  A 
curious  thing  in  England  is  this :  I  think  that  is  one  way  where 
they  have  a  way  of  simplifying  an  issue  —  the  public  is  called 
upon  to  make  a  very  small  choice  —  to  decide  between  a  very 
small  number  of  men.  For  instance,  in  a  Parliamentary  election 
the  only  thing  a  man  votes  for,  as  a  rule,  is  a  single  member  of 
Parliament. 

Mr.  Hale. —  How  many  names  may  be  on  the  ticket  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  There  may  be  a  number.  He  has  to  pick  out 
the  man  that  he  wants.  He  is  not  voting  for  a  number.  There 
are  some  boroughs  where  they  elect  two  men  in  one  borough. 
There  are  not  very  many  of  those  double-headed  constituencies. 
When  he  votes  in  his  municipal  election  he  there,  as  a  rule,  votes 
for  a  single  member  of  the  city  council,  and  so  on.  When  he  votes 
for  his  county  council,  there  he  votes  for  a  single  man. 

They  get  a  very  short  ballot. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  Don't  you  think  that  the  American  voter  is 
rather  jealous  of  his  right  to  name  those  who  shall  govern  ? 

Dr.  Lowell. —  The  voter  is  very  anxious  to  do  things  he  can- 
not do,  and  he  knows  perfectly  well  that  he  cannot  do  them. 


Doc.  No.   14  50 

What  I  always  say  to  myself  is,  and  I  think  I  am  a  voter  of 
average  intelligence,  when  I  go  to  the  polls  and  find  I  have  got  to 
stop  and  ask  somebody  how  to  vote,  because  the  list  is  so  long  of 
names  I  don't  know,  I  feel  that  probably  a  great  many  other 
people  are  in  the  same  situation  and  feel  the  same  as  I  do.  whereas. 
if  the  number  were  less,  I  know  I  should  vote  more  intelligently. 
I  think  the  American  public  is  a  little  too  willing  to  undertake  a 
great  many  things  they  cannot  do  well.  I  think  we  are  inclined 
to  try  to  do  such  things;  I  think  that  is  our  national  temptation. 
Many  successful  business  men  are  men  whose  business  has  grown 
big  and  they  simply  cannot  adopt  the  method  of  a  big  business. 
but  have  to  adopt  the  methods  of  a  small  business.  I  think  that 
is  the  trouble  with  our  people. 

We  have  grown  big,  and  we  are  quite  unconscious  of  how  big 
we  have  grown,  and  we  still  think  we  can  run  things  as  we  did 
while  we  were  little. 

Chairman  Tannek. —  If  that  is  all,  Mr.  Chairman,  I  move  that 
this  Committee  extend  thanks  to  Dr.  Lowell  for  coming  and  ad- 
dressing us. 

Mr.  Cullinan. —  I  second  the  motion. 

Which  motion  was  unanimously  carried. 

Chairman  Stimsox. —  President  Lowell,  I  assure  you,  on  be- 
half of  both  Committees,  that  we  are  very  much  indebted  to  vou 
for  coming  and  for  the  delightful  way  in  which  vou  have  pre- 
sented the  matter  to  these  Committees. 

Dr.  Lowell. —  I  thank  vou,  I  am  sure,  and  I  assure  you  I 
rather  enjoyed  having  the  afternoon  with  you. 

Whereupon  the  hearing  adjourned. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN   CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  15 


MEETING  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  STATE  FINANCES, 
WITH  HON.  JOHN  J.  FITZGERALD 


Koom  332,  The  Capitol, 
Albany,  N.  Y.,  May  26,  1915,  3:30  p.  m. 
Hon.  Henry  L.  Stimson,  Chairman. 
The  Committee  will  please  come  to  order. 

The  Chairman. —  We  have  the  pleasure  of  having  with  us 
to-day  Mr.  Fitzgerald,  who  has  been  for  two  Congresses  the  Chair- 
man of  the  Committee  on  Appropriations  of  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives, and  has  therefrom  had  the  chief  charge  of  the  making 
up  of  four  national  budgets,  so  far  as  a  budget  exists  in  our 
national  government  to-day.  He  has  very  kindly  consented  to 
come  up  here  and  to  give  us  his  experience  and  his  suggestions  in 
regard  to  financial  legislation,  as  he  has  seen  it  in  Congress. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald,  the  methods  of  this  Committee  are  perfectly 
informal,  and  I  suggest  that  you  follow  your  own  wishes  in  re- 
gard to  the  way  in  which  you  care  to  present  to  us  what  you  have 
to  say.  If  you  prefer  to  do  it  that  way,  I  suggest  that  you  make 
your  own  statement  and  then,  if  you  are  willing  for  us  to  ask 


Doc.  No.  15  2 

you  questions,  afterward,  I  am  sure  there  are  probably  a  number 
of  us  who  will  do  so. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  I  will  be  very  happy  to  put  myself  in  the 
hands  of  the  Committee.  There  are  so  many  familiar  faces  here 
that  I  feel  I  will  be  in  the  hands  of  my  friends  for  the  time  being, 
at  least, 

I  have  not  come  prepared  with  any  systematic  statement  about 
State  finances  or  even  of  the  finances  of  the  Federal  government. 
At  the  invitation  of  the  Chairman  of  the  Committee  I  was  glad 
to  come,  and,  if  my  experience  and  information  could  be  of  any 
service,  gladly  give  to  the  committee  such  information  as  I  had. 

My  work  has  been  concerned  chiefly  with  certain  problems  aris- 
ing in  the  attempt  to  curtail  the  expenses  of  the  Federal  govern- 
ment. I  have  been  a  member  of  the  House  of  Representatives 
sixteen  years,  during  all  of  that  time  serving  on  committees  that 
had  jurisdiction  of  some  appropriation  bills,  and  for  ten  years  a 
member  of  the  Committee  on  Appropriations,  which  handles  about 
50  per  cent,  of  the  appropriations  of  the  Federal  government. 
One  of  the  crying  evils  in  the  Federal  system  at  present  results 
from  the  action  of  the  House  of  Representatives  in  1885  in  dis- 
tributing control  of  appropriation  bills  among  eight  different 
committees  of  the  House.  Until  that  time,  from  the  creation  of 
the  Committee  on  Appropriations  in  1865,  with  the  exception  of 
what  is  known  as  the  Agricultural  Appropriation  Bill,  and  for  a 
short  time  the  River  and  Harbor  Appropriation  Bill,  all  of  the 
appropriations  in  Congress  were  under  the  control  of  a  single 
committee  from  the  beginning  of  the  government,  the  Committee 
on  Ways  and  Means.  In  1865  the  work  had  become  so  great  that 
the  jurisdiction  of  that  committee  was  distributed  among  three 
committees,  the  Ways  and  Means,  Appropriations,  and  Banking 
and  Currency.  And  in  1885  a  number  of  important  appropria- 
tion bills  were  taken  from  the  Committee  on  Appropriations  and 
given  to  other  committees  of  the  House. 

The  history  of  that  movement  shows  unquestionably  that  it  was 
undertaken  largely  for  the  purpose  of  breaking  the  power  of  Mr. 
Randall  of  Pennsylvania,  who  at  that  time  as  the  Chairman  of 
the  Committee  on  Appropriations,  a  man  of  great  power  and 
force,  twice  speaker  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  had  led  a 


3  Doc.  No.  15 

revolt  in  the  Democratic  party  in  the  preceding  Congress,  by 
which  the  enacting  clause  of  the  Mills  Tariff  Bill  was  stricken 
out ;  and  in  order  to  break  his  power  the  movement  was  initiated 
and  culminated  in  the  distribution  of  these  bills.  At  that  time 
it  was  predicted  by  a  large  number  of  men  of  experience  and  great 
capacity,  that  the  result  inevitably  must  be  greatly  increased 
appropriations.  I  recall  that  Mr.  Cannon  stated  to  me  a  few 
years  ago  that  the  increase  in  appropriations  from  that  time  until 
Mr.  Cleveland  found  it  necessary  to  issue  bonds  to  restore  and 
maintain  the  gold  reserve  in  the  treasury  about  equalled  the 
$260,000,000  bonds  it  was  necessary  to  issue.  There  is  no  doubt 
that  in  that  period  and  since  then  the  expenditures  of  the  Federal 
government  have  increased  out  of  all  proportion  to  the  increase 
in  population  and  wealth  of  the  United  States.  Still,  that  is  not 
alone  peculiar  to  the  Federal  government.  The  cost  of  State  and 
municipal  governments  of  recent  years  has  been  very  greatly  in- 
creasing out  of  proportion  to  the  increase  in  wealth  and  popula- 
tion of  all  communities,  and  it  is  due  to  a  very  great  extent  to  the 
fact  that  movements  of  all  sorts  were  pressed  for  the  purpose  of 
having  governmental  organizations  undertake  functions  that  do 
not  properly  come  within  the  legitimate  sphere  of  governments. 

Everybody  who  has  a  scheme  to  reform  mankind  or  better  man- 
kind finds  it  so  much  easier  to  get  money  from  the  public  treasury 
than  private  sources,  and  it  seems  to  be  such  a  popular  cry  to  have 
the  government  undertake  these  things,  that  the  Federal  govern- 
ment, I  know,  has  gone  far  afield  in  undertaking  things  no  one 
ever  contemplated  would  be  undertaken  when  the  Federal  govern- 
ment was  instituted.  I  have  proposed  in  the  House  of  Representa- 
tives as  the  first  step  necessary  to  control  the  expenditures  of  the 
Federal  government,  that  all  of  the  appropriations  be  centered  in 
the  committee  in  the  House  of  Representatives;  and  a  similar 
action  would  necessarily  follow  in  the  Senate.  It  is  during  my 
own  service,  if  I  recall  correctly,  that  the  Senate  distributed  con- 
trol of  the  appropriation  bills.  And  one  reason  for  the  distribu- 
tion is  the  natural  jealousy  of  members  of  legislative  bodies  of  the 
power  that  necessarily  goes  to  those  who  have  intimate  control  of 
expenditures  in  the  government.  Every  member  of  the  legislative 
body  thinks  that  he  is  just  as  important  and  just  as  influential  and 


Doc.  Xo.  15  4 

just  as  competent  as  every  other  member.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  a 
comparatively  few  men  specialize  and  become  expert  in  various 
lines.  But  every  one  wants  to  exercise  as  much  power  as  he  can 
acquire,  and  one  way  is  found  in  obtaining  control  of  the  appro- 
priations. But  that  would  not-  be  sufficient  to  eliminate  the  evils. 
It  would  be  the  first  step.  We  have  reached  a  point  in  our  Fed- 
eral expenditures  now  aggregating  a  thousand  —  a  hundred  mil- 
lion dollars  a  year,  when  it  is  necessary  to  either  very  greatly  in- 
crease the  tax  —  the  taxes  levied  by  the  Federal  government  or  else 
to  curtail  present  activities  or  stop  extending  the  activities  of  the 
government. 

We  have  reached  about  the  limit  of  revenue  under  our  present 
systems,  and  if  the  government  is  to  continue  to  expand  and  in- 
crease its  activities,  there  must  necessarily  be  very  greatly  in- 
creased revenues. 

My  own  opinion  —  and  what  I  say  has  no  particular  bearing 
on  politics  —  my  own  opinion  is  that  one  of  the  sources  of  fiscal 
trouble  in  the  Federal  government  has  been  the  protective  system  of 
the  tariff.  That  is  where  a  large  portion  of  our  revenues  has  been 
raised  without  any  relation  whatever  to  its  necessities.  That  the 
tariff  bill  has  been  framed  not  for  the  purpose  primarily  of  obtain- 
ing revenue,  but  primarily  to  protect  industries  in  this  country, 
with  the  question  of  revenue,  while  important,  not  necessarily  the 
prime  element;,  so  that  in  adjustment  of  revenues,  there  might  be 
very  large  accessions  of  revenue,  regardless  of  the  necessity  of  the 
money  for  the  legitimate  and  economical  conduct  of  the  govern- 
ment. That  element  is  absent  in  those  systems  of  governments 
where  the  parliamentary  system  exists  and  where  exists  the  so- 
called  budget  system.  Our  system  differs  so  radically  from  the 
English  system,  for  instance,  that  it  is  difficult  to  discuss  subjects 
as  compared  to  our  system  with  any  system  of  government  similar 
to  the  British  system.  There  the  government  represents  the  ma- 
jority of  the  Commons  as  expressed  in  the  most  recent  election. 
It  prepares  all  the  business  except  private  business.  It  presents 
it  to  the  House.  The  ministers  or  Cabinet  are  the  men  in  charge 
of  the  business  in  the  government,  and  when  they  determine  their 
budget,  that  is  the  amount  of  money  that  is  necessary  to  conduct 
the  affairs  of  the  government,  they  also  determine  the  character 


5  Doc.  No.  15 

of  legislation  that  is  necessary  in  order  to  produce  the  necessary 
revenue  to  meet  the  expenditures,  and  wherever  their  budget  state- 
ment shows  that  there  will  be  a  surplus  of  revenues  over  the  pro- 
posed expenditures,  their  budget  always  indicates  the  manner  in 
which  that  surplus  will  be  disposed  of,  either  by  applying  it  to 
some  new  activities,  or  indicating  that  certain  portions  of  it  will  go 
toward  the  reduction  of  their  debt.  Now,  our  system  differs  radi- 
cally because  we  separate  —  and  one  of  the  distinctive  character- 
istics of  our  system  of  government  is  the  complete  separation  at 
least  in  theory  of  the  executive  —  or  I  might  put  it,  as  the  Fathers 
did,  of  the  Legislative,  Executive  and  Judicial  branches  of  the 
government.  So  that  we  have  under  our  system  the  executive  pro- 
posing the  moneys  that  may  be  necessary  to  conduct  a  government 
and  a  legislative  body  determining  how  much  will  be  allowed  for 
that  purpose ;  and  in  the  framing  of  our  tax  legislation,  the  execu- 
tive, as  a  matter  of  fact,  is  not  predominant ;  and  it  has  not  been 
under  any  political  parties,  so  far  as  my  experience  or  reading 
goes. 

The  executive  may  have  great  influence  on  certain  details  of  tax 
legislation,  but  the  legislative  body,  the  Congress  of  the  United 
States,  determines  the  great  bulk  of  items  and  rates  and  ways  in 
which  revenues  shall  be  obtained.  So  that  we  have  a  system  by 
which  the  legislative  originates,  as  it  must,  under  the  Constitu- 
tion, the  legislation  for  raising  revenue  and,  while  the  manner  in 
which  it  shall  be  expended  is  proposed  by  the  Executive,  the  Con- 
gress determines  for  itself  as  the  direct  representatives  how  it 
shall  be  expended. 

Now,  it  has  been  said  that  the  Federal  government  has  no  sys- 
tem whatever  approaching  the  budget  system.  But  that  statement 
is  not  accurate  unless  a  very  narrow  meaning  is  given  to  the  word 
"  budget,"  I  summarized  in  a  speech  which  I  made  in  1913,  the 
laws  controlling  the  submission  of  estimates.  President  Taft  in 
1913  transmitted  a  report  to  Congress  made  by  the  so-called  Com- 
mission on  Economy  and  Efficiency,  and  in  that  message  he  said : 

"  The  Government  is  not  only  in  the  position  of  having  gone 
along  for  a  century  without  a  budget,  but,  what  is  at  this  time  even 
more  to  the  point,  it  has  not  the  organic  means  either  for  prepar- 
ing or  for  considering  one.     In  the  executive  branch  there  is  no 


Doc.  No.  15  8 

There  are  two  theories  as  to  whether  anv  member  of  the 
•Cabinet  should  have  that  right.  One  school  advocates  the  con- 
centration in  some  one  member,  and  it  was  suggested  the  Secre- 
tary of  the  Treasury,  because,  under  the  statute  creating  the 
Treasury  Department,  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  is  the  only 
member  of  the  Cabinet  who  makes  his  report  directly  to  Con- 
gress ;  it  has  been  suggested  that  he  be  required  to  revise  the  esti- 
mates so  as  to  submit  them  to  Congress. 

There  is  another  school  which  insists  that  the  Congress  is 
entitled  as  a  matter  of  right  to  have  submitted  to  it  the  best  judg- 
ment of  the  heads  of  all  the  departments,  as  to  the  amounts  of 
money  required  to  conduct  their  departments,  and  the  various 
purposes  to  which  the  money  is  to  be  applied,  and  then  that  the 
Congress  should  exercise  the  right  to  determine  whether  the  pub- 
lic service  requires  those  sums  to  be  actually  appropriated  and,  if 
necessary,  additional  revenues  be  obtained,  or  whether  it  will 
determine  to  eliminate  certain  specific  items  so  as  to  eliminate 
the  necessity  for  the  additional  revenues. 

The  Chairman. —  As  a  matter  of  practice,  whatever  the  dif- 
ferent theories,  it  is  a  fact,  isn't  it,  that  the  estimates  go  in  with- 
out any  such  revision  ? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Without  any.  There  was  an  attempt,  I 
think,  during  the  administration  of  Mr.  Taft,  by  himself,  to  ex- 
ercise some  control  in  that  way.  My  recollection  is  he  issued  an 
order  that  after  the  annual  estimates  had  been  transmitted,  no 
supplemental  estimates  should  be  submitted  unless  he  approved 
them,  and  I  know  that  some  officials  in  the  government  some 
time  complained  that,  as  a  result  of  that,  they  were  unable  to 
submit  requests  for  increases  of  compensation  of  certain  officials, 
because  they  did  not  quite  care  to  take  up  those  questions  with 
the  President,  -as  they  did  not  seem  to  have  sufficiently  good  rea- 
sons to  induce  him  to  approve  them,  although  they  might  have 
found  champions  in  Congress  who  would  have  found  reasons 
adequate  for   his  action. 

The  Chairman. —  His  step  was  quite  revolutionary  to  the 
regular  practice  ? 


9  Doc.  No.   15 

Mr.  Fitzgeeald. —  Yes,  and  it  had  a  good  effect  along  certain 
lines.  And  this  statement  —  I  will  not  read  it  entirely  —  shows 
that  Congress  —  all  of  these  laws  originated  with  Congress  for 
the  purpose  —  so  far  as  possible  of  compelling  department  heads 
to  furnish  accurate  information  and  to  furnish  it  in  a  systematic 
and  logical  manner.  Then  this  was  found  to  be  a  practice  com- 
mon to  all  administrations  and  parties,  so  what  I  say  does  not 
apply  to  one  political  party  more  than  another,  and  does  not 
apply  to  any  particular  individual,  because  I  find  out  that  men 
who  have  been  very  staunch  economists  in  the  House,  become 
very  profligate  as  the  heads  of  executive  departments.  It  seems 
to  depend  upon  the  atmosphere  in  which  they  exist  as  to  how 
they  operate.  But  Congress  in  1909  passed  what  was  known  as 
the  Smith  amendment  which,  if  it  had  ever  been  lived  up  to  by 
any  administration,  would  have  had  tremendous  value.  It  has 
not  been.  Neither  Democrats  nor  Republicans  have  followed  it ; 
and  they  don't  follow  it,  because  they  don't  like  it.  I  will  read 
the  provision : 

"  Immediately  upon  receipt  of  the  regular  annual  estimates 
of  appropriations  needed  for  the  various  branches  of  the  govern- 
ment, it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  to 
estimate  as  nearly  as  may  be  the  revenues  of  the  government  for 
the  ensuing  fiscal  year,  and  if  the  estimates  for  the  appropriations 
including  the  estimated  amount  necessary  to  meet  all  continuing 
and  permanent  appropriations  shall  exceed  the  estimated  rev- 
enues, the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  shall  transmit  the  estimates 
to  Congress  as  heretofore  required  by  law,  and  at  once  transmit 
a  detailed  statement  of  all  of  said  estimates  to  the  President,  to 
the  end  that  he  may,  in  giving  Congress  information  of  the  State 
of  the  Union,  and  in  recommending  to  their  consideration  such 
measures  as  he  may  deem  necessary,  advise  the  Congress  how  in 
his  judgment  the  estimated  appropriations  could  with  the  least 
injury  to  the  public  service  be  reduced  so  as  to  bring  the  appro- 
priations within  the  estimated  revenues  or  if  such  reduction  be 
not  in  his  judgment  practicable,  without  undue  injury  to  the 
public  service,  he  may  recommend  to  the  'Congress  such  loans  or 
new  taxes  as  are  necessarv  to  cover  the  deficiency." 


Doc.  No.  15  10 

If  that  law  were  complied  with  by  any  administration,  it  would 
more  nearly  give  us  a  responsible  budget  system  than  anything 
else  that  can  be  devised,  because  it  does  this:  It  requires  an  ad- 
ministration to  estimate  how  much  money  is  required  to  conduct 
the  public  service.  It  then  requires  the  fiscal  officer  of  the  gov- 
ernment to  estimate  how  much  revenue  will  be  produced  under 
the  existing  laws.  If  the  revenue  will  not  be  sufficient  to  meet 
the  expenditure  that  the  administration  deems  desirable  and 
necessary,  then  the  responsibility  is  put  upon  the  President,  who 
is  the  head  of  the  administration  to  say.  first,  whether  some  of 
these  things  that  the  members  of  his  cabinet  have  suggested, 
should  be  done  during  that  year,  can  without  injury  to  the  public 
service  be  omitted,  and  if  they  cannot,  how,  in  his  opinion,  money 
should  be  obtained  to  meet  these  expenses,  either  by  the  way  of 
loans  or  taxes. 

The  Chairman.- —  That  statute  has  in  it  the  germ  of  a  budget 
system,  has  it  not? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  It  is,  as  near  as  we  can  come  to  it,  under 
our  theory  of  the  government,  unless  we  want  to  radically  change 
it  and  so  intermingle  the  executive  and  legislative  branches  of 
the  government  as  to  give  members  of  the  administration  a  place 
in  the  houses  of  Congress.  Now.  that  statute  has  been  avoided, 
and  a  most  notorious  instance  of  it  is  the  following:  I  read  the 
statement  of  a  law  where,  after  the  estimates  are  transmitted 
to  Congress,  supplemental  or  additional  estimates  cannot  be 
transmitted  unless  to  carry  out  legislation  which  has  been  enacted 
subsequently  to  the  date  when  the  estimates  are  required  to  be 
submitted  to  Congress  or  unless  deemed  imperatively  necessary 
by  the  happening  of  some  subsequent  event,  and  in  that  instance 
the  head  of  the  department  must  transmit  in  connection  with 
the  estimate  a  full  explanation  of  tin1  reasons  which  make  it. 
imperative. 

Well,  there  was  an  estimate  submitted  to  Congress  for  a  certain 
purpose  for  a  million  dollars,  and  in  compliance  apparently  with 
that  statute,  the  head  of  the  department  made  this  statement: 
"  This  estimate  was  not  included  in  the  annual  book  of  estimates 
because  of  the  desire  to  keep  the  estimates  as  low  as  possible." 


11  Doc.  Xo.   15 

It  was  a  fraud  on  Congress;  it  was  a  gross  violation  of  the 
law,  and  a  great  injustice  to  the  country,  because  it  was  simply, 
to  use  the  vernacular,  a  thimble-rigging  affair.  It  did  not  submit 
to  Congress  what  they  believed  necessary  but  kept  the  estimate 
low  enough  to  come  within  the  estimated  revenues,  and  then  in 
violation  of  the  other  laws  transmitted  those  estimates.  That 
should  be  prevented. 

The  Chairman. —  While  you  are  on  that  subject,  it  is  not 
quite  fair  to  lay  all  the  blame  of  the  non-observance  of  that 
statute  on  the  executive  branch  of  the  government,  is  it  \  As  I 
remember  it,  there  was  some  opposition  on  the  legislative  side 
also.  At  the  time  when  Mr.  Taft,  under  that  statute,  was 
trying  to  prepare  the  first  budget  my  recollection  is  that  the 
House  of  Representatives  passed  a  resolution  directing  him  to 
submit  the  estimates  in  the  old  form,  and  not  in  the  budget  form 
which  he  was  trying  to  do. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  We  put  that  provision  in.  If  we  had  not 
done  it  we  would  have  had  chaos  in  the  fiscal  affairs  of  the 
government.  While  members  of  the  Cabinet  know  how  to  ad- 
minister departments  of  the  government,  they  do  not  know  how 
to  conduct  fiscal  affairs  of  government.  There  has  not  been  one 
—  except  those  present  —  who  have  served  in  the  Cabinet  who 
did  not  ask  more  than  they  required  to  properly  carry  on  the 
government.  That  is  from  the  standpoint  of  the  men  who  were 
directly  represented  by  the  people  to  protect  the  treasury. 

Xow,  in  the  four  years  I  have  been  Chairman  of  the  Com- 
mittee on  Appropriations  —  I  take  charge  of  the  Sundry  Civil 
Appropriation  Bill  —  we  reported  the  bill  four  separate  years. 

That  bill  in  those  four  years  has  carried  $97,000,000  less  than 
the  amount  of  money  asked  for  by  the  departments  to  conduct 
the  public  sendee.  The  Senate  added  a  large  number  of  items. 
The  Secretary  is  familiar  with  what  the  Senate  does.  Everything 
the  House  leaves  out  the  Senate  puts  in,  and  then  a  few  things 
the  individual  Senators  are  peculiarly  interested  in.  When  the 
bill  was  finally  enacted  into  law,  the  four  bills  were  $59,000,000 
less  than  the  amounts  requested  by  the  departments  to  conduct 
the  government.     I  defv  any  man  that  ever  lived  to  show  that 


Doc.  No.  15  12 

in  a  single,  solitary  iota,  the  affairs  of  the  government  were  in 
any  way  injured,  any  public  service  was  hindered  or  damaged, 
or  was  not  conducted  even  better  than  if  they  had  the  $59,000,- 
000  they  didn't  get.  iSTot  only  that.  I  undertake  to  say  that 
without  any  trouble  at  all,  if  there  were  only  half  a  chance,  in 
the  sixteen  years  I  have  been  in  Congress,  the  government  could 
have  been  as  well  conducted  for  from  fifty  to  one  hundred  millon 
dollars  less  than  it  has  been  conducted  for. 

The  Chairman. —  A  year  ? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald.—  I  don't  say  three  hundred,  but  it  would- 
average  from  fifty  to  a  hundred. 

The  Chairman. —  Each  year  ? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Each  year. 

Mr.  Parsons. —  That  $59,000,000  you  refer  to  in  connection 
with  the  Sundry  Civil  Bill  is  spread  over  four  years '( 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Fifteen  million  dollars  a  year ;  average 
of  $15,000,000  a  year  in  a  bill  which  would  average  about  $115,- 
000,000  a  year;  so  it  would  be  about  14  per  cent.,  roughly,  of  the 
amount  that  was  requested;  and  even  then  I  know  that  I  had  to 
consent  to  a  large  nuruber  of  items  that  I  knew  and  everybody 
else  knew  were  not  essential  for  the  proper  maintenance  of  the 
government. 

The  Chairman. —  Well,  isn't  it  a  fact  — 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  That  is  inherent,  of  course,  in  our  system  of 
government. 

The  Chaikmax. —  That  the  estimates,  as  they  now  go  in  .  are 
too  high,  as  everybody  knows  ? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Well,  there  is  this.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  think 
we  should  bear  in  mind.  Of  course,  the  man  who  is  conducting  a 
great  department  of  the  government,  if  he  is  of  any  real  value  as 
an  executive,  becomes  very  greatly  impressed  with  the  importance 
of  his  work,  with  its  necessity  and  with  the  desirability  of  its 
proper  extension  ;  and  he  is  planning  and  proposing  the  extension 


13  Doc.  No.  15 

or  the  increase  of  the  activities  of  his  department.  Some  of  the 
thing's  are  important  and  valuable,  but,  relatively  speaking,  they 
are  not.  If  we  had  unlimited  sources  of  funds,  and  if  our  theory 
of  government  was  that  it  was  best  for  the  people  that  the  govern- 
ment should  engage  in  every  conceivable  activity  of  government, 
that  would  be  the  way  in  which  it  would  work  out  best.  But,  as 
a  matter  of  fact  —  the  proper  theory  of  our  government  is  that  we 
should  engage  in  as  few  activities  that  can  be  as  equally  well  done 
by  private  individuals  as  possible,  and  if  that  were  lived  up  to, 
to  the  fullest  extent,  we  would  very  radically  reduce  the  cost  of 
our  government.  I  don't  know  that  in  our  State  the  same  prob- 
lems would  confront  the  administration  of  the  fiscal  affairs,  as  in 
the  Federal  government,  We  have  434  members  of  the  House  of 
Representatives.  We  have  ninety-six  Senators.  They  represent 
localities.  Localities  are  interested  particularly  in  certain  phases 
of  the  Federal  government.  In  a  great  mining  community  they 
want  the  activities  of  the  Bureau  of  Mines  extended  as  rapidly  and 
as  greatly  as  possible.  In  the  agricultural  communities  they  de- 
sire the  activities  of  the  Department  of  Agriculture  extended.  If 
the  army  worm  appears  on  a  man's  farm  nowadays,  instead  of  the 
old  fashioned  way  of  plowing  two  or  three  rows  up,  so  as  to  stop 
it,  he  sends  an  S  O  S  to  the  Department  of  Agriculture,  and  they 
send  several  scientists  with  all  kinds  of  poisonous  decoctions  to 
kill  the  army  worm. 

Then,  on  our  sea  coasts,  we  are  interested  in  the  deepening  and 
improvement  of  waterways,  the  enlargement  and  increasing  of  the 
coast  defences,  so  that  the  community  spirit,  the  locality  spirit,  is, 
as  it  is  intended  to  be,  represented  in  the  two  bodies. 

Well,  a  member  of  Congress  who  is  dependent  for  his  official 
life  and  thinks  more  about  that  than  anything  else, —  upon  getting 
some  activity  of  the  government  extended  into  his  district,—  is 
not  concerned  about  how  much  money  is  to  be  appropriated  to 
maintain  the  entire  government.  He  is  not  concerned  about  where 
it  is  coining  from ;  so  long  as  he  gets  his  particular  appropriations 
to  be  expended  in  his  particular  locality,  he  is  willing  to  take 
chances  upon  satisfying  the  people  of  his  district  that  the  other 
evils  are  so  far  off  or  imaginary,  that  they  are  not  affected ;  and 
that  is  particularly  true  under  our  indirect  system  of  taxation. 


Doc.  No.  15  14 

One  thing,  in  my  opinion,  that  will  stop  it  more  than  anything 
else  is  the  continued  and  further  extension  of  the  income  tax  after 
it  gets  working  properly  and  gets  reached  out  to  where  the  limit  of 
incomes  taxed  will  bring  the  great  mass  of  people  within  the  pro- 
visions of  the  law,  there  will  be  a  keener  interest  in  whether  an 
appropriation  that  is  made  is  satisfactory  or  not.  For  instance,  I 
know  a  community  of  about  800  people  where  it  costs  for  rent, 
light,  heat  and  janitor  service,  less  than  $600  a  year  for  the 
facilities  required  for  the  administration  of  the  post-office  de- 
partment, that  secured  through  the  activity  of  their  Representative 
in  Congress  a  public  building  of  bronze  and  marble,  as  fine  as 
anything  that  can  be  found  in  the  United  States,  and  it  is  so  out  of 
place  that  it  even  makes  the  landscape  look  shabby.     (Laughter.) 

Now,  it  is  estimated  that  the  cost  —  the  permanent  charge  on 
the  government  for  that  building  is  between  9  and  10  per  cent,  a 
year;  so  that  we  have  a  fixed  charge  of  about  $7,500,  in  place  of 
one  of  $600.  It  would  be  necessary  for  a  man  to  have  served  in 
Congress  to  appreciate  the  rapaciousness  with  which  men  from  the 
smaller  communities  seek  the  appropriations  for  the  public  build- 
ings. 

The  Chairman. —  You  got  the  full  brunt  of  that  as  chairman 
of  the  Appropriation  Committee,  didn't  you  ? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  I  have  a  unique  record.  I  opposed  the 
appropriation  proposed  to  extend  the  post-office  facilities  of  the 
district  in  which  I  live,  and  they  appropriated  it  in  spite  of  me; 
largely  because  I  thought  if  they  needed  to  enlarge  the  postal 
facilities  in  Brooklyn,  they  should  think  of  Brooklyn  as  it  is  to- 
day, and  not  as  it  was  thirty  years  ago,  and  they  might  perhaps, 
on  mature  consideration  find  a  more  appropriate  and  economical 
place  for  the  handling  of  mails,  for  a  post-office.  A  post-oihVe 
that  is  located  off  from  the  subway  and  transit  systems  is  not  the 
economical  place  in  a  modern  city. 

Hut  that  condition  that  I  have  described  results  in  this:  That 
most  of  the  House  of  Representatives  generally  are  not  interested 
particularly  in  whether  an  appropriation  bill  carries  a  largo  or 
small  sum.  They  have  an  academic  interest  in  it.  Tf  they  are  in 
the  majority  they  like  to  say,  "  Well,  they  have  done  well  on  this 


15  Doc.   No.   15 

bill ;  they  have  brought  it  in  in  good  shape."  But  if  they  have 
some  peculiar  interest  in  something  they  want  to  provide  for,  and 
for  which  provision  is  not  made,  they  are  willing,  as  a  rule  to 
vote  for  everything  that  is  proposed,  if  it  will  result  in  enough 
votes  being  given  for  the  matter  in  which  they  are  interested.  The 
result  is  that  a  committee  after  weeks  of  painstaking  work,  very 
onerous  labors,  trying  to  balance  up  the  possible  revenues  and 
possible  expenditures,  trying  to  determine  the  relative  importance 
of  proposed  matters  that  will  bring  a  bill  into  the  House,  very 
frequently  finds  itself  antagonistic  to  the  sentiment  of  the  House, 
and  the  sums  are  largely  increased.  Then  the  Senate  adds  on,  and 
then  the  departments.  If  the  head  of  a  department  comes  to  the 
House  of  Representatives  and  does  not  get  everything  he  asks  for, 
he  immediately  goes  to  the  Senate  and  complains  of  what  the 
House  did.  and  some  accommodating  Senator  always  helps  him  to 
have  it  put  on  the  bill ;  and  then  it  is  merely  a  question  of  recon- 
ciling these  differences  and  doing  the  best  that  can  be  done  to  get 
these  bills  down.  The  result  is  that  instead  of  being  able  to  tell  in 
the  beginning  of  the  session  of  Congress,  with  any  approximation 
whatever,  about  what  the  Congress  should  appropriate  to  support 
the  government  in  the  next  year,  it  takes  about  two  days  after  it 
has  finished  making  its  appropriations  to  tell  what  has  been  appro- 
priated. And  then  you  can  tell  whether  you  are  near  your 
revenues  or  not. 

Xow,  I  proposed  a  remedy  for  that  and  I  believe  it  must  come 
eventually  in  Congress.  It  grows  out  of  the  provision  in  the  Con- 
federate Constitution.  The  men  who  prepared  that  document 
wore  men  of  great  capacity  and  long  public  service  in  the  public 
life  of  the  United  States.  They  'had  a  provision  in  their  Con- 
stitution that  must  have  come  from  their  experience  and  their 
knowledge  of  the  affairs  of  Parliament  that  prohibited  Congress 
from  appropriating  any  money  unless  it  had  been  requested  by  the 
head  of  the  department,  unless  by  a  two-thirds  vote,  or  unless  it 
was  to  pay  a  claim  against  the  government  or  for  its  own  expenses; 
that  last  is  a  very  important  matter,  because  an  executive  might 
attempt  to  entirely  curtail  or  hamper  the  legislative  body  by  re- 
fusing to  estimate  for  its  expenses ;  and  I  should  have  added  one 
other  thing:     That  was  under  certain  conditions  the  expenses  of 


Doc.  No.   15  16 

the  judiciary,  although  the  two-thirds  provision  would  give  them 
power  to  do  that. 

The  Chairman. —  Won't  you  read  that  provision  to  the  Com- 
mittee ? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Yes,  I  have  that  here. 

The  Chairman. —  The  Confederate  Constitution. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Article  1  of  Section  9  of  the  Confederate 
Constitution : 

"  Congress  is  forbidden  to  appropriate  money  from  the  treas- 
ury except  by  a  vote  of  two-thirds  of  both  houses  unless  it  be 
asked  by  the  head  of  a  department  and  submitted  by  the  President 
or  be  asked  for  the  payment  of  its  own  expenses  or  of  claims 
against  the  Confederacy  declared  by  a  judicial  tribunal  to  be 
just." 

That  is,  that  the  determination  of  a  court  —  the  final  de- 
termination of  a  court  of  a  claim  against  the  Confederate  govern- 
ment was  paid  without  the  intervention  of  the  executive  de- 
partment. And  we  have  in  practice  what  is  similar.  That  is, 
all  judgments  of  the  court  are  certified  to  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives  as  audited  claims,  and  they  are  included  automatically 
in  one  of  the  appropriation  bills,  with  the  provision  that  they 
shall  not  be  paid  unless  the  time  of  appeal  has  expired,  or  unless 
the  Attorney-General  certified  they  do  not  intend  to  appeal. 

The  Chairman. —  That  provision  you  have  read  is  quite 
similar  to  the  one  existing  for  200  years  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons rule,  isn't  it? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Yes. 

The  Chairman. —  Have  you  that  with  you  ? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  The  rule  of  the  House  of  Commons  is : 

"  This  House  will  receive  no  petition  for  any  sum  relating 
to  public  service  or  proceed  upon  any  motion  for  a  grant  or  charge 
upon  the  public  revenue  *  *  *  unless  recommended  by  the 
Crown." 

But  there  is  a  distinction.     The  recommendation  by  the  Crown, 


17  Doc.  No.  15 

of  course,  is  the  submission  by  the  government  or  the  Ministry 
of  its  proposed  grants  to  the  'Crown.  Now,  the  government  which 
is  responsible  for  the  control  and  the  administration  of  the 
government,  and  which  is  the  representative  of  the  majority  of 
the  'Commons  as  expressed  by  the  people  at  its  last  election,  sub- 
mits its  proposals.  If  the  •Commons  are  not  satisfied  with  the 
budget,  they  can  reject  it,  overturn  the  government,  or  they  can 
reduce  or  strike  out  some  item.  But  the  rule  was  to  prevent  the 
followers  of  the  government  from  taking  things  into  their  own 
hands,  and,  regardless  of  the  determination  of  the  men  selected 
as  the  responsible  ministry,  to  force  money  on  him  to  spend  that 
he  determined  that  they  did  not  need.  The  remedy  in  that  case 
is,  if  the  House  of  Commons  believed  they  submitted  a  budget 
which  did  not  provide  for  expenditures  for  important  matters 
that  should  be  granted,  to  reject  the  budget  and  the  Ministry 
would  be  compelled  to  resign  and  appeal  to  the  country,  or  ap- 
point a  new  Ministry  that  would  include  in  its  budget  the  things 
the  Commons  wished.  Of  course,  we  have  no  such  method  of 
reaching  things. 

The  Chairman. —  But  the  effect  on  the  budget  of  the  Con- 
federate provision  was  to  prevent  estimates,  or  the  budget  you 
may  call  it,  after  it  had  reached  the  Congress,  from  being  raised 
by  this  demand  of  individuals  on  the  floor. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Well,  I  think  it  was  designed  at  that  time 
to  prevent  what  was  so  commonly  referred  to  as  log-rolling. 

The  Chairman. —  That  is  the  short  name  for  it. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  That  is  the  combination  of  the  individuals 
to  appropriate  money  for  certain  designated  functions  of  govern- 
ment that  the  responsible  government  did  not  believe  necessary, 
desirable  or  expedient  at  the  particular  time,  and  yet  there  might 
be  great  emergencies  and  there  might  be  occasions  when  money 
should  be  appropriated  and  the  administration  should  be  com- 
manded to  do  certain  things  that  it  was  unwilling  to  do,  and  that 
power  should  be  reserved  to  the  legislative  body,  and  with  that 
provision  of  the  two-thirds  vote,  it  was  amply  safeguarded,  be- 
cause we  might  have  an  administration  that  would  decline  to  do 


Doc.  Xo.  15  18 

certain  things  that  there  was  an  overwhelming  public  sentiment 
insisting  upon.  An  election  might  be  conducted  upon  sg^me  issue, 
and  after  the  administration  came  into  power,  the  executive  side 
of  the  department  might  change  its  mind,  and  yet  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  people  of  the  two  Houses  might  more  truly  and 
accurately,  representing  the  expressed  sentiment  of  the  country, 
be  determined  that  the  thing  decided  should  be  done,  and  they 
should  have  that  power  to  compel  the  Executive  to  act  under  such 
circumstances. 

Now,  of  course,  under  the  State  government  there  is  one  thing 
that  is  supposed  to  safeguard  that,  but  in  many  respects,  in  effect, 
it  is  a  weakness.  When  I  first  went  to  Congress,  I  thought  it  was 
such  a  desirable  thing  that  I  contemplated  to  bring  in  an  amend- 
ment to  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  and  a  little  ex- 
perience made  me  drop  it,  and  that  was  the  right  of  the  Executive 
to  veto  items  in  appropriation  bills. 

Of  course,  we  have  what  is  not  common  in  the  State  practice. 
The  items  in  the  appropriation  bills  that  there  is  a  demand  the 
executive  be  given  authority  to  veto  —  it  is  not  as  a  rule  grants 
of  money,  but  it  is  a  substantive  provision  of  law.  which  could 
not  be  enacted  in  any  other  way.  For  instance,  we  abolished  the 
Court  of  'Commerce  in  the  Appropriation  Bill.  I  was  somewhat 
instrumental  in  doing  that.  I  was  in  favor  of  it.  I  thought  it 
should  be  abolished.  There  was  a  great  difference  of  opinion. 
The  President  was  very  strongly  in  favor  of  retaining  it,  and  yet 
there  was  a  two-thirds  vote  of  the  two  houses  in  favor  of  abolish- 
ing that  court.  Of  course,  if  a  bill  could  do  it  and  come  before 
the  'Congress,  it  could  have  passed  over  the  President's  veto.  The 
only  way  to  accomplish  it  was  to  incorporate  it  in  the  appropria- 
tion bill.  Whether  it  is  a  desirable  thing  to  do  or  not,  apart  from 
that,  under  the  Anglo-Saxon  theory  of  government,  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  people  should  bo  in  a  position  to  compel  an 
executive  by  the  coercion  exercised  by  the  refusal  to  grant  neces- 
sary supplies  to  conduct  the  government,  to  acquiesce  in  legisla- 
tion that  two-thirds  of  the  two  houses  would  say  is  particularly 
desirable. 

The  Chairman. —  1  notice  that  this  Confederate  provision 
applies  not  only  to  appropriation  bills,  but  to  all  legislation,  all 


19  Doc.  No.  15 

legislation  carrying  appropriations,  whether  separate  or  whether 
in  general  appropriation  hills. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Well,  we  have  an  evil  under  the  present 
system.  I  think  it  is  common  in  the  State  Legislatures  apart  from 
jour  supply  and  appropriation  bill,  to  pass  a  number  of  inde- 
pendent measures,  and  they  provide  for  certain  increased  activi- 
ties, or  certain  new  functions  to  be  exercised  by  the  government 
and  provide  the  money. 

What  I  would  do  in  those  cases  —  I  would  prohibit  the  legis- 
lative body  from  making  the  appropriation  in  the  bill.  Let  them 
authorize  the  facility,  authorize  this  new  function  and  require  an 
estimate  to  be  made  for  it. 

Xow  it  might  be  —  you  take  in  Congress  —  it  might  be  that  in 
December  it  would  be  thought  very  desirable  at  the  beginning  of 
the  next  fiscal  year  which  would  be  the  1st  of  July  to  initiate 
some  new  activity  of  the  government,  and  Congress  might  pass 
a  law  creating  a  bureau  or  a  division,  establishing  some  new 
service,  and  yet  by  May  it  might  be  apparent  that,  while  it  would 
be  desirable,  the  financial  condition  of  the  government  would  be 
such  that  it  would  be  better  to  postpone  it.  I  would  put  the 
responsibility  to  some  extent,  at  least,  for  the  amount  asked  and 
to  be  added,  upon  the  executive  department,  and  I  would  compel 
them  to  submit  the  estimate,  and  if  they  declined  to  do  it  —  why. 
with  some  such  power  as  this,  a  larger  vote  than  two-thirds  vote 
would  pass  it.  I  was  recently  in  Canada,  and  I  was  speaking  to 
a  member  of  the  Canadian  Parliament  there,  and  their  supply 
bills  —  and  it  is  an  interesting  thing  —  are  withheld  from  final 
action  until  the  very  last  thing.  It  is  the  very  last  enactment  of 
their  Parliament.  It  excited  my  curiosity  and  the  theory  was, 
according  to  his  statement,  that  that  was  to  give  everybody  an 
opportunity  to  petition  the  Crown  for  redress  or  for  relief,  and 
the  last  thing  that  was  done  was  to  finally  pass  on  the  supply  bill, 
and  in  that  way  they  could  include  in  it  every  grant  that  was 
necessary.  That  eliminated  all  possibility  of  the  separate  enact- 
ments appropriating  money. 

The  Chairman. —  May  I  interrupt  you  just  a  minute  in  order 
to  be  sure  we  get  it  clearly,  because  that  is  a  matter  which  this 


Doc.  No.   15  20 

Committee  has  discussed  ?  I  understand  jour  suggestion  is  that 
the  Legislature  should  be  prohibited  not  only  from  increasing  the 
appropriation  bills,  but  from  passing  separate  bills  carrying  the 
money  appropriations,  and  that  whenever  they  wished  to  increase 
the  function  of  government,  they  should  pass  a  bill  within  their 
abundant  power  which  would  make  it  the  duty  thereafter  of  the 
executive  to  include  the  necessary  moneys  in  the  budget  to  carry 
out  that  function. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  But  I  would  not  make  it  absolutely  pro- 
hibitive on  the  Legislature  — 

The  Chairman. — ■  I  understand. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  to  appropriate,  because  I  doubt  if  that 
would  be  wise,  to  go  that  far,  under  our  present  conditions,  and 
neither  would  I  make  it  compulsory  upon  the  executive  to  submit 
an  estimate  for  every  service  which  the  law  authorized,  but  there 
would  be  an  opportunity  to  fix  the  responsibility  for  the  failure 
to  request  it,  and  there  would  be  the  opportunity  for  the  Legis- 
lature to  make  the  appropriation  —  only  I  should  make  it  more 
difficult  if  the  executive  failed. 

Our  great  trouble  is  this:  That  as  long  as  times  are  good  and 
money  is  easy  and  revenues  are  plentiful  nobody  cares  particularly 
what  the  legislative  body  does  in  expending  money,  but  as  soon 
as  the  expenditures  increase  so  that  taxation  becomes  burdensome, 
there  is  a  general  controversy  as  to  who  is  at  fault,  and  who  should 
be  held  responsible  for  the  condition  that  embarrasses  the  public 
by  levy  of  taxes. 

We  ought  to  have  some  way  in  the  system  of  our  government  to 
fix  direct  responsibility,  and  you  cannot  fix  responsibility  if  the 
power  is  too  greatly  scattered.  We  must  concentrate  the  power  and 
concentrate  the  responsibility.  We  must  have  some  one  to  whom 
the  people  can  go.  If  you  have  it  too  diffuse,  while  the  agitation 
may  be  great  you  never  reach  anybody. 

Tjie  'Chairman. —  And  where  do  you  suggest  that  concentration 
be  put  in  the  way  of  initiating  these  estimates? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  I  would  put  it  in  the  Executive.  T  would 
make  him  responsible  at.  the  outset,  and  T  have  had  experience  with 


21  Doc.  Xo.  15 

■executives.  I  have  an  interesting  line  of  correspondence  in  my 
files,  extending  over  a  number  of  years,  coming  right  down  to 
date,  and  it  is  similar  in  all  instances,  in  which  the  Executive  ex- 
presses his  sympathy  with  the  efforts  to  keep  down  public  ex- 
penditures as  low  as  possible  and  expresses  some  complimentary 
expressions  to  those  engaged  in  that  work,  "  but  this  matter  has 
just  been  called  to  my  attention  and  it  seems  so  important  and 
desirable,  I  hope  it  will  be  possible  to  make  provision  for  it." 

I  know,  I  know  that  the  most  ancient,  time-worn,  moss  covered 
things  that  have  been  rejected  time  and  time  again,  are  placed 
before  the  Executive  in  such  an  attractive  way  that  these  letters 
come  about  them.  He  doesn't  know,  and  he  can't  know.  But  if  in 
some  way  he  could  be  compelled  to  realize  that  at  a  certain  time 
he  must  make  up  his  mind  what  the  important  and  desirable  things 
are,  and  after  that  period  he  has  to  defer  suggestions  for  another 
year,  why,  men  will  be  keener  to  get  before  him  everything  that 
is  essential. 

The  action  which  President  Taft  took,  which  we  have  dis- 
cussed, had  this  result :  Every  member  of  that  Cabinet  before  he 
finally  passed  on  the  estimates  of  his  subordinates,  he  had  not  per- 
haps paid  much  attention  to  them,  some  of  them,  prior  to  that 
time,_  but  before  he  finally  passed  on  that,  they  did  a  good  deal  of 
inquiring  about  the  various  bureaus  and  services  of  these  depart- 
ments. He  wants  to  know  if  this  thing  were  taken  care  of,  and  if 
this  were  desirable.  He  had  to  know  just  what  he  thought  would 
be  imperative  for  the  public  service  of  his  department  next  year, 
so  as  to  have  them  all  included,  and  taken  up,  because  he  realized 
it  would  be  so  much  more  difficult.  Xow,  what  happened  —  I 
■don't  know  how  you  can  prevent  this  very  thing  except  by  the  tak- 
ing of  the  initiative  away  from  Congress  —  was  this :  In  a  certain 
—  we  will  take  any  department  of  the  government ;  when  the  esti- 
mates were  prepared,  the  head  of  the  department  eliminated  some 
item  which  was  very  dear  to  the  chief  of  a  bureau  and  the  esti- 
mates went  in  without  that  item.  It  was  useless  for  him  to  ap- 
peal to  the  head  of  the  department,  because  he  could  not  satis- 
factorily explain  to  the  President  why  it  had  not  gone  in.  Xow, 
this  chief  of  bureau  has  been  in  Washington  a  o-ood  while  and  he 
had  — 


Doc.  l\To.  15  22 

The  Chairman. —  He  knew  the  way  to  the  Capitol. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  connections.  He  was  not  a  stranger  in 
town,  and  he  explained  to  some  friend  he  thought  would  have  some 
influence,  and  they  put  that  thing  in  there  in  the  appropriation 
bill. 

The  Chairman. —  Put  it  in  Congress  ? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Well,  the  head  of  the  department  never 
protested  against  it.  If  he  could  get  that  in  addition  to  the  other 
things  he  asked  for,  he  was  satisfied.  He  would  not  discipline 
his  subordinate  for  this  back-handed  way  of  going  behind  the 
administration  and  increasing  the  appropriations  on  it. 

Everybody  was  too  busy  to  keep  track  of  it.  and  in  that  way 
to  a  considerable  extent  the  beneficial  results  of  that  order  were 
undone. 

If  the  House  of  Representatives  and  the  Senate  had  been  oper- 
ating under  a  provision  that  they  could  not  have  included  except 
by  a  two-thirds  vote,  an  item  that  had  not  been  requested  by  the 
executive,  there  would  have  been  a  very  great  difference.  Mr. 
Gladstone,  in  one  of  his  great  budget  speeches,  laid  down  the 
principle  to  which  I  referred  in  this  speech.  He  said  that  the 
proper  function  of  a  legislative  chamber  —  here,  I  will  find  it  — 
"  Is  not  to  augment  but  to  decrease  expenditures."  Of  course  he 
was  speaking  largely,  with  the  view  largely  in  mind  of  their 
peculiar  system  of  government. 

The  Chairman. —  That  is  what  it  means  to  hold  the  purse 
strings,  generally,  to  shut  them,  and  not  to  open  them. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Some  persons  object  that  we  should  not 
deprive  the  representatives  of  the  people  of  this  right  to  loosen 
up  the  purse  strings,  but  the  universal  condition  in  this  country 
to-day  is  not,  that  we  must  safeguard  the  rights  of  the  people  to 
get  money  for  things.  The  wThole  curse  of  our  condition  is  that 
everybody  is  doing  their  utmost  to  get  it,  and  succeeds,  and  the 
evil  that  must  be  corrected  —  the  evil  that  must  be  corrected  is 
the  evil  of  excessive  expenditure,  and  that  is  why  in  directing 
our  attention  to  it  I  am  not  alarmed  at  the  fact  that  the  admin- 
istration won't  get  enough  money  to  do  anything.     1   have  inner 


23  Doc.  No.   15 

known  any  administration  —  and  it  is  an  unfortunate  condition 
when  the  head  of  any  department  of  the  government  is  able  to 
say  —  and  it  can  be  said  by  them  right  along  in  the  Federal 
government  —  that  "  I  didn't  think  it  was  necessary  or  desirable 
to  spend  this  money,  but  Congress  insisted  on  appropriating  it 
for  this  purpose,  and  I  must  acquiesce  in  the  expressed  will  of 
Congress."  And  I  know  one  department  of  the  Federal  govern- 
ment where  the  common  thing  is  to  beg  Congress  to  appropriate 
more  money  than  the  department  asks.  I  undertake  to  say  that  it 
can  be  conducted  for  30  per  cent,  less,  and  better  conducted  than 
with  the  money  now  obtained,  because  it  is  the  most  profligate, 
extravagant  department  to  be  found  in  the  United  States.  They 
are  engaging  in  all  kinds  of  schemes,  enterprises  and  activities 
that  have  no  more  connection  with  government  than  they  have 
with  the  government  of  Mars.  I  represent  a  certain  county  of 
a  district,  and  I  could  go  to  that  department  in  the  summer,  when 
campaign  time  came,  and  get  three  or  four  highly  paid  experts, 
a  moving  picture  outfit,  and  lecturers,  and  go  from  one  end  of 
my  district  to  another,  conducting  an  illustrated  lecture  bureau 
ostensibly  for  the  enlightenment  of  my  constituents,  but  pri- 
marily to  retain  me  in  Congress. 

That  is  a  desirable  thing,  I  admit.  (Laughter.)  But  it  is 
not  really  an  important  thing  from  the  standpoint  of  the  people 
and  the  government. 

Now,  if  there  were  some  way  by  which  that  could  be  stopped, 
and  it  is  difficult  to  stop  it,  I  don't  think  I  am  immune  from  any 
of  these  vices  or  evils,  I  am  just  as  human  as  anybody  else  in 
Congress,  and  I  don't  particularly  criticize  the  man  who  does 
resort  to  these  things,  but  we  must  in  some  way  eliminate  the 
temptation  of  the  possibility  of  this  kind  of  action ;  and  when 
a  man  is  unable  to  do  things  of  that  character,  along  that  line, 
when  he  cannot  force  up  appropriations,  why,  then  his  only  in- 
terest is  in  seeing  that  they  appropriate  properly,  and  it  does 
this:  It  would  do  what  is  done  in  the  governments  where  they 
had  a  responsible  government  with  the  budget  system.  If  my 
constituents  are  keenly  interested  in  some  matter  that  requires 
an  expenditure  of  public  money,  I  would  be  compelled  to  present 
that  matter  to  the  department  that  had  charge  of  it.     They  would 


Doc.  No.   15  24 

make  their  investigation.  And  they  would  determine  whether  it 
was  one  of  those  things  that  should  be  included,  and  they  would 
have  to  take  the  responsibility  for  requesting  it. 

They  could  not  say  John  Smith  forces  that  on  us.  And  then 
the  total  of  these  submissions  would  be  contrasted,  and  the  ad- 
ministration should  be  compelled,  to  save  time,  to  make  definite 
and  concrete  recommendations  as  to  how  the  money  should  be 
obtained  to  meet  these  drafts  on  the  treasury. 

Now,  I  don't  know  that  there  is  much  more  I  could  say  in  this 
desultory  way.     I  will  answer  any  questions. 

Mr.  Parsons. —  In  your  service,  how  many  instances  have  you 
known  where  it  was  advantageous  that  Congress  increase  the 
amount  of  an  appropriation  suggested  by  the  executive  ( 

The  Chairman. —  Where  it  was  advantageous  ? 

Mr.  Parsons. —  Where  it  was  advantageous. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  It  would  be  too  broad  a  statement  to  say 
never  in  my  experience,  but  I  think  it  would  be  very  rare.  The 
head  of  a  department  of  the  government  is  so  naturally  interested 
in  his  department  doing  what  it  should  do,  and  doing  it  properly 
and  successfully,  that  they  invariably  request  the  money  that  they 
need.  Now,  sometimes  the  head  of  a  department  believes  that 
something  should  not  be  done.  His  experience  teaches  him  that  it 
is  a  waste  of  money;  there  iis  no  beneficial  result,  and  he  does  not 
ask  for  much,  and  Congress  appropriates  the  money,  and  he  says, 
"  Well,  this  is  what  the  Congress  wishes,  and  I  ought  to  spend 
it."  I  think  that  happens.  But  I  would  say  it  is  a  very  rare 
thing,  and  then  only  because  either  for  some  oversight  or  because 
of  the  change  in  conditions  from  the  time  the  estimates  were  sub- 
mitted, that  it  becomes  necessary  or  desirable  for  Congress  to 
appropriate  more.  I  have  had  this  experience:  Estimates  would 
be  submitted,  and  several  months  afterwards  in  the  course  of  the 
investigations  the  head  of  the  department  would  state  a  situation 
in  which  it  would  be  his  opinion  that  a  larger  sum  of  money  would 
bo  required  than  originally  asked.  The  rule  of  the  Committee  on 
Appropriations,  which  is  not  the  rule  in  the  other  committees,  is 
to  require  the  head  of  department  to  submit  the  supplemental 


25  Doc.  No.   15 

estimate  in  compliance  with  the  law,  and  then  act  under  that 
request.  But  the  situation  which  I  understand  you  have  in  mind, 
that  a  department  determines  a  certain  amount  is  necessary  and 
Congress,  without  any  suggestion  from  the  department,  increases 
that, —  they  are  very  rare,  and  they  result  mostly  from  the  under- 
handed suggestions  from  people,  subordinates,  in  the  department, 
who  want  to  magnify  their  work  and  importance. 

Mr.  Parsons. —  Or  because  some  Member  of  Congress  wants 
something  done  in  his  particular  locality. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  That  is  very  largely  the  situation. 

Mr.  Parsons. —  "Well,  are  there  many  instances  where  the  ex- 
ecutive recommends  doing  away  with  some  customary  appropria- 
tion, and  Congress  refuses  to  do  it  —  whether  in  your  opinion  it 
would  be  well  to  do  it  ? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  The  most  notorious  illustration  of  that  was 
the  reorganization  of  the  customs  service,  where  some  in  'Congress 
recommended  reorganization  in  order  to  eliminate  a  large  number 
of  useless  offices.  But  the  man  who  represented  the  district  in 
which  there  were  two  or  three  Presidential  offices  could  speak  most 
eloquently  upon  the  necessity  of  retaining  them.  It  was  only 
within  a  few  years  that  we  succeeded  in  doing  that.  The  same 
was  true  in  connection  with  the  maintenance  of  certain  assay 
offices,  although  there  might  perhaps  have  been  more  justification 
for  the  position  taken  by  those  who  urged  their  retention  because 
the  assay  office  was  right  at  the  place  where  the  metal  was  pro- 
duced, and  they  had  a  better  argument  than  the  customs  service. 
Tn  fact,  in  the  customs  service  we  have  saved  about  $800,000  a 
year  as  a  result  of  that  reorganization,  and  it  unquestionably  is  a 
much  more  effective  and  superior  organization  than  under  the  old 
system. 

The  Chairman. —  How  many  years  was  the  old  system  kept 
up  after  the  heads  of  departments  recommended  the  change? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Oh,  they  recommended  changes  for  a  good 
many  years.  I  don't  know  how  many.  I  think  all  the  time  I 
have  been  in  Congress ;  we  wanted  to  get  it  through  four  years 
ago.     The  first  year  I  was  Chairman  of  the  Committee. 


Doc.  ISTo.   15  26 

Mr.  Parsons. —  The  same  is  true  of  the  pension  agencies? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  The  same  is  true  of  the  pension  agencies. 
We  had  an  antiquated  system  by  which  a  pension  voucher  was 
made  out  in  the  Pension  Office  in  Washington.  There  were  nine 
or  ten  or  twelve  agencies  with  the  agent  receiving  from  $3,500 
to  $4,500  a  year,  with  an  office  there.  Those  vouchers  were 
mailed  from  Washington  to  the  agent's  office  and  from  there  +o 
the  pensioner,  and  they  were  executed  and  returned  to  the  agent's 
office  and  then  to  Washington,  and  then  the  checks  were  sent  out. 

We,  after  a  number  of  years,  abolished  the  agencies  and  pro- 
vided for  the  adorjtion  of  the  voucher  checking  system,  so  that 
now  when  a  pension  is  due,  a  man  is  mailed  his  pension  check, 
with  a  voucher  attached,  and  the  one  act  of  endorsing  the  check, 
having  it  witnessed  by  two  witnesses,  completes  the  whole  trans- 
action.    And  that  is  natural. 

Public  opinion  in  a  locality  is  very  peculiar.  That  is  the 
effect  of  public  opinion  that  controls  the  action  of  legislatures 
and  the  representative  of  a  community  who  has  in  that  com- 
munity certain  positions  which  are  filled  more  or  less  upon  his 
recommendation  must  be  a  man  of  very  unusual  political  virtue 
to  aid  in  the  abolishing  of  the  positions  while  his  party  is  in 
power  and  his  friends  have  the  offices.      (Laughter.) 

Mr.  Low. —  Mr.  Fitzgerald,  I  gathered  from  what  you  said, 
and  I  am  interested  to  know  whether  I  understood  you  correctly, 
that  you  thought  that  under  our  American  system  it  would  be 
judicious  to  give  the  Executive  the  suggestion  of  a  budget  to  be 
passed  upon  by  the  Legislature  under  conditions  which  would 
prevent  the  Legislature  from  increasing  an  item  except  by  a  two- 
thirds  vote.    Was  that  the  idea  you  intended  to  convey  ? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  I  hardly  think  that  it  would  bo  wise  to  — 
that  is,  I  am  speaking  of  my  experience  in  the  Federal  govern- 
ment —  whether  it  would  be  wise  at  one  step  to  completely  de- 
prive Congress  of  the  right  to  appropriate  the  ordinary  expendi- 
tures of  the  government  unless  the  Executive  had  estimated. 
But  I  would  make  it  so  difficult  for  them  to  do  it,  that  the  times 
they  would  do  it  would  bo  only  such  occasions  when  there  could 


27  Doc.   No.  15 

not  be  any  question  that  they  ought  to  do  it.      I  think  to  abso- 
lutely prohibit  would  probably  be  — 

Mr.  Low. —  Fatal. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  too  extreme  as  a  start ;  but  to  make  it  a 
matter  of  extraordinary  difficulty,  because  in  my  experience  I 
have  not  known  any  embarrassment  of  any  substantial  character 
to  come  to  any  department  of  Federal  government  because  they 
did  not  have  sufficient  funds.  Now,  when  Mr.  Root  was  Secre- 
tary of  State,  that  was  one  department  that  had  more  trouble, 
perhaps,  in  gettting  the  assistance  that  was  required,  than  any 
other  department  in  the  government,  and  there  has  in  recent 
years  been  considerable  reorganization  and  extension  of  the 
assistance  given  to  it.  I  have  no  doubt  the  organization  is 
much  more  effective,  and  yet,  while  it  may  have  been  annoying 
and  difficult  and  embarrassing  at  times  to  the  personnel  of 
the  department,  no  substantial  interest  of  the  country  suffered 
as  a  result  of  it.  There  is  something  that  the  people  forget, 
that  it  is  not  the  personal  inconvenience  of  the  official  that 
is  of  much  moment.  I  don't  worry  so  much  because  men  in 
the  executive  departments  complain  that  they  cannot  get  home 
to  dinner  —  when  Congress  is  in  session.  I  have  to  work  six 
teen  to  eighteen  hours  a  day,  so  that  if  the  head  of  a  great 
department  of  the  government  must  work  eight  or  nine  or  ten 
or  eleven  hours  a  day,  it  is  the  best  indication  he  is  doini? 
his  work  properly,  because  he  has  to  take  some  time  to  think 
if  he  is  going  to  do  his  business  and  he  cannot  spend  his  time 
away  from  his  work;  I  don't  mean  in  his  office,  but  the  heads 
of  the  departments  in  our  Federal  system  must  do  considerable 
work  apart  from  the  time  they  spend  in  their  office  hours,  or  the 
departments  are  not  conducted  by  them ;  they  are  conducted  by 
somebody  else.  Now,  it  may  embarrass,  and  there  are  times,  T 
have  no  doubt,  when  there  is  great  personal  inconvenience  and 
perhaps  personal  hardship  upon  some  employe  of  the  government 
because  of  the  failure  of  Congress  to  do  some  one  thing  or  an- 
other; but  no  substantial  interest  of  the  government  suffers,  as 
far  as  I  have  known,  because,  after  all,  of  course  it  is  something 
that  is  lost  sight  of,  as  soon  as  a  man  is  elected  to  Congress. 


Doc.  No.  15  28 

Members  of  Congress  are  just  ordinary  human  beings,  about  the 
average  in  intelligence  and  capacity  of  the  people  they  represent 
and  they  do  not  change  when  they  go  to  Washington.  They  are 
just  as  anxious  to  provide  the  government  with  the  means  and 
the  facilities  to  have  it  properly  conducted,  and  they  do  to  the 
best  of  their  ability  do  that.  Of  course,  there  are  always  differ- 
ences of  opinion,  but  they  do  manage  to  provide  the  means  and 
facilities.  At  times  a  department  may  be  a  little  hampered, 
some  official  may  be  required  to  devote  more  time  than  could 
reasonably  be  expected  to  his  work,  but  there  is  always  adequate 
means  of  handling  the  work.  Of  course,  this  question  arises, 
and  that  is  on  a  question  of  broad  policy,  whether  some  activity 
of  the  government  shall  enter  upon  some  activity  or  perform 
some  function  that  has  not  been  undertaken,  and  the  head  of  a 
department  may  be  very  keen  to  have  it  do  it.  He  may  be  very 
enthusiastic  about  it,  and  may  be  disappointed  that  Congress 
does  not  do  that,  but  then  that  is  a  matter  to  be  determined  by 
the  legislative  body,  and,  while  he  may  be  disappointed,  the  legis- 
lative body  must  assume  the  responsibility  for  the  failure  to 
extend  the  activities  of  the  government  in  the  way  proposed. 

Mr.  Low. —  That  is  precisely  what  the  Legislature  is  for,  isn't 
it? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  That  is  our  theory  of  government.  'We 
may  not  be  very  successful  at  it  at  times,  but  that  is  our  theory, 
and  that  is  where  the  responsibility  should  be,  and  I  have  never 
had  much  sympathy  with  the  proposal  that  the  legislative  body 
should  be  merely  a  ratification  meeting  and  that  everything  that 
an  Executive  proposes  in  the  matter  of  legislation,  however  it 
may  catch  the  popular  fancy,  must  be  approved  by  the  Legisla- 
ture or  else  they  are  a  lot  of  debauched,  corrupt  and  incompetent 
men,  because  I  have  seen  Executives  who  have  been  misled  at 
times,  and  they  have  lived  to  repent  and  to  rejoice  that  the 
Legislature  was  obstinate. 

Mr.  Parsons. —  As  far  as  the  Federal  government  is  con- 
cerned, would  you  have  the  budget  made  up  by  the  Executive 
in  connection  with  the  river  and  harbor  improvements  and 
public,  buildings  and  so  on,  all  those  things? 


29  Doc.  No.   15 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Well,  I  would  very  radically  change  our 
method  of  public  buildings.  We  don't  provide  public  buildings 
for  the  public  service.      (Laughter.) 

In  the  great  mass  of  cases,  we  provide  them  to  meet  certain 
political  exigencies  of  a  locality.  You  might  as  well  be  perfectly 
frank  about  that.  Congress  has  authorized  public  buildings  that 
cannot  be  completed  within  six  years.  Some  cannot  be  completed 
within  four  or  five  years  after  they  aire  authorized,  unless  we  very 
greatly  augment  the  capacity  of  the  supervising  architect's  office 
to  turn  out  public  buildings.  Now,  we  spend  about  $20,000,000 
a  year  for  public  buildings.  The  supervising  architect's  office  is 
geared  to  turn  out  about  $12,000,000  a  year,  it  claims.  Up  to 
about  1900  we  had  authorized  from  the  beginning  of  the  govern- 
ment about  four  hundred  and  some  odd  public  buildings,  I  think. 
Since  that  time  we  have  authorized  about  500. 

The  Chairman. —  I  saw  a  statement  that  in  1909  Congress 
appropriated  $20,000,000  for  post  offices  which  the  Postmaster- 
General  had  not  recommended. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Well,  of  course,  he  nover  recommends  post 
offices  at  all. 

The  Chairman. —  Well,  which  he  stated  were  unnecessary. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  But  I  say  the  Postmaster-General  does  not 
recommend.  But  I  don't  think  there  is  any  question  —  they  have 
been  doing  that  ever  since  I  have  had  any  knowledge  of  it.  This  is 
what  happens  on  public  buildings  in  the  Federal  government: 
Suppose  I  represent  a  community  or  district  which  has  no  large 
city,  perhaps  the  largest  town  in  it  may  be  twenty  or  fifteen  thou- 
sand. I  may  have  one  or  two  communities  like  that.  And  none 
of  them  has  a  public  building;  but  across  the  line  in  some  other 
district,  the  town  of  equal  size,  has  a  public  building  that  costs 
$50,000  or  $75,000.  Now,  I  am  a  candidate  for  office  and  I  go 
in  that  town  and  in  my  speech  T  announce  that  T  propose  to  have 
a  public  building  put  there.  In  most  of  these  places,  unless  you 
have  a  good  sized  city,  a  thousand  dollars  furnishes  ample  for 
postal  facilities,  and  then  they  have  an  authorization  to  buy  a 
site.    And  they  pay  New  York  prices  out  in  the  sa2;e  brush  country 


Doc.  !STo.   15  30 

for  lots,  and  the  government  buys  post  offices.  And  then,  in  a 
community  of  eight  or  nine  hundred,  based  upon  the  theory  that 
there  is  a  tremendous  postal  business,  they  will  authorize  a  build- 
ing of  fifty  thousand  dollars,  nothing  less  than  fifty  thousand  dol- 
lars and  up.  Then,  in  order  to  get  a  better  building,  a  Member  of 
Congress  will  pass  a  bill  providing  that  there  shall  be  a  term  of 
court  held  in  this  town,  and  maybe  the  court  —  the  Federal  Court 
will  sit  there  three  terms  a  year,  and  maybe  it  will  take  two  days 
each  term  to  do  all  the  Federal  Court  business  in  the  town;  and 
then  because  a  Federal  Court  is  to  sit  at  that  town,  they  need  a 
court  room  and  additional  facilities  and  they  increase  the  amount 
to  be  expended  in  the  building  and  some  other  governmental  ac- 
tivity will  be  provided,  and  the  result  is  that  you  can  go  all  over 
the  United  States  and  find  buildings  costing  from  seventy-five 
thousand  dollars  to  one  hundred  and  fifty  thousand  dollars  in  com- 
munities ranging  from  one  thousand  to  five  thousand  people. 

Mr.  Potter. —  How  will  you  stop  that.  Mr.  Fitzgerald  ? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Why,  I  would  have  a  President  who  would 
veto  a  couple  of  those  bills  once  in  a  while  and  we  would  stop  it. 

One  of  the  things  that  is  interesting  in  political  history  shows 
that  they  do  not  do  it;  but  this  is  what  happened  to  a  man  who 
had  the  courage  to  stop  it:  One  of  the  charges  made  against  Mr. 
Cannon  when  he  was  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representatives 
was  that  by  the  arbitrary  exercise  of  his  great  power  he  refused  to 
permit  to  be  considered  a  bill  for  which  two-thirds  of  the  members 
of  the  House  had  signed  a  petition.  It  was  what  was  known  as  a 
Public  Buildings  bill,  and  they  had  so  framed  the  bill  and  had 
taken  care  of  so  many  members  to  their  satisfaction  that  more  than 
two-thirds  of  the  members  of  the  House  signed  a  petition  asking 
to  have  it  considered  by  unanimous  consent,  or  if  he  would  not  do 
that,  to  recognize  the  chairman  of  the  committee  to  move  to  sus- 
pend the  rules  and  pass  the  bill ;  and,  as  was  customary  in  those 
days  when  a  request  of  that  character  was  made  of  the  Speaker, 
he  took  the  bill  and  turned  it  over  to  some  one  who  was  familiar 
with  matters  of  appropriation.  This  bill  was  turned  over,  I  think, 
to  the  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Appropriations,  and  sub- 
mitted to  analysis  by  some  men  who  were  experts  in  these  matters, 


31  Doc.   No.  15 

and  they  made  a  report  as  to  what  this  bill  proposed  to  do,  and 
when  Mr.  Cannon  found  out  the  character  of  the  buildings  and  the 
kinds  of  places  that  it  was  proposed  to  expend  twenty  odd  million 
dollars,  he  notified  the  chairman  of  the  committee  that  he  would 
not  recognize  him  to  suspend  the  rules.  It  was  in  his  discretion 
under  the  rules  to  recognize  him,  and  there  was  a  controversy, 
and  he  said,  "  I  will  not  recognize  any  one  to  move  to  suspend  the 
rules  to  pass  that  bill,  but  if  two-thirds  of  this  House  has  the  cour- 
age of  its  convictions,  as  indicated  in  that  petition,  it  can  remove 
me  as  Speaker,  and  put  in  a  Speaker  who  will  acquiesce  in  their 
wishes  and   pass  the  bill."     (Laughter.)     And   the  bill   was  not 


Now,  that  is  one  of  the  things,  strange  to  say,  for  which  he 
was  so  severely  condemned,  for  the  arbitrary  exercise  of  power  in 
which  he  had  denied  to  the  House  of  Representatives  as  expressed 
in  the  signatures  of  more  than  two-thirds,  an  opportunity  to  con- 
sider the  bill. 

The  Chairman. — That  story  suggests  that  in  order  to  accom- 
plish the  reform  which  you  mentioned,  it  may  be  necessary  to 
raise  that  two-thirds  point  a  little  bit  higher. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  No.     The  veto  power  is  very  effective. 

Mr.  Parsons. —  Well,  there  was  a  rule,  was  there  not  —  That 
is,  under  the  rules  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  it  takes  a 
two-thirds  vote  to  suspend  the  rules,  and  there  was  a  case  where 
they  passed  the  River  and  Harbor  Appropriation  Bill  under  the 
suspension  when  it  was  not  read  at  all,  without  any  chance  of 
amendment. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Those  things  will  be  done,  any  way,  but 
it  would  be  very  unlikely  if  a  bill  like  the  one  I  have  described 
were  passed  and  were  afterwards  vetoed  by  the  President,  and  in 
his  veto  message  he  pointed  out  his  reasons,  it  would  be  very 
unlikely  —  in  fact,  it  would  be  impossible  to  get  the  necessary 
votes  to  pass  that  bill  over  his  veto. 

The  Chairman. — The  publicity  which  it  would  get  there  would 
have  weight,  of  course. 


Doc.  No.  15  32 

Mr.    Fitzgerald. 
some  place,  and  then  proper  publicity. 

Mr.  Lincoln. —  Under  your  plan  of  budget,  the  budget  is  to 
go  from  the  executive  to  the  House  of  Representatives  \ 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Well,  under  our  law,  all  estimates  are 
transmitted  to  the  House  of  Representatives  by  the  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury,  the  heads  of  departments  and  independent  estab- 
lishments that  do  not  happen  to  be  under  a  head  of  a  department, 
by  the  15th  of  October;  must  be  transmitted  to  the  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury.  He  is  required  to  classify  them,  arrange  them 
properly,  and  if  they  are  not  presented  properly,  to  arrange  them. 
If  the  estimates  are  not  presented  he  must  prepare  them,  ana 
there  are  certain  requirements  of  the  statute  requiring  that  they 
must  submit  reference  to  the  statute  authorizing  the  particular 
expenditure,  and  where  it  is  found.  That  comes  in  what  is  known 
as  a  book  of  estimates. 

Mr.  Lincoln. —  My  point  was  this:  The  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives under  your  plan,  I  believe,  may  lower  but  not  increase 
the  recommendations  of  the  Executive.     Is  that  correct  ? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Lincoln. —  Well,  then,  what  becomes  of  it  when  it  goes, 
to  the  Senate?  They  may  only  lower  but  not  increase  the  ap- 
propriations of  the  House? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Well,  under  that  plan  the  Senate  ought  to 
be  bound  by  the  same  rule  that  they  might  recommend  within  the 
estimates  submitted,  but  should  not  have  a  right  to  include  things 
not  estimated,  because  I  would  sooner  give  the  House  the  larger 
power  than  the  Senate  on  these  matters,  but  one  House  should 
not  have  a  power  in  that  respect  that  the  other  does  not  have. 

Tiie  Chairman. —  Your  plan  involved  having  both  houses 
bound  by  the  same  rule? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  By  the  same  rule,  because  if  the  Senate 
could  increase  or  amend  in  regard  to  the  recommendations  you 
would  simply  transfer  to  the  Senate  all  legislative  power,  or  if 


33  Doc.   No.  15 

the  House  had  that  power  and  the  Senate  did  not,  it  would  com- 
pletely emasculate  the  powers  of  the  other  body. 

Mr.  Lincoln. —  Would  that  be  final,  if  the  Senate  raised  the 
appropriations  made  by  the  House  up  to  the  amount,  we  will  say, 
the  Executive  has  proposed  —  is  that  final  in  your  plan? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  No ;  when  that  is  done,  the  procedure  is 
this:  The  House  passes  a  bill.  It  goes  to  the  Senate,  is  con- 
sidered in  a  committee  and  may  be  amended  there,  or,  when  it 
finally  passes  the  Senate,  is  passed  with  certain  amendments. 
Then  the  bill,  with  the  Senate  amendments,  comes  back  to  the 
House.  Now,  the  House  can  agree  to  those  amendments.  If  it 
agrees,  they  pass  the  bill.  If  not,  it  disagrees  with  them,  it  sends 
them  back,  and  the  Senate  either  insists  on  its  amendments  and 
asks  the  House  to  appoint  managers  to  confer,  or  recedes  from  its 
amendments.  They  appoint  conferees,  three  members  from  each 
house,  and  they  meet  and  adjust  their  differences  the  best  they 
can.  They  must  have  a  complete  agreement  and  have  the  House 
ratify  the  agreement  which  is  made  in  the  other  body. 

Mr.  Lincoln. —  You  find  that  Conference  Committee  worked 
satisfactory  ?  I  don't  mean  you  —  but  is  that  a  satisfactory 
method  ? 

Mr..  Fitzgerald. —  It  is  the  only  way  you  can  adjust  the 
differences.  It  must  be.  It  is  the  recognized  known  parliamentary 
method  when  two  houses  are  in  difference.  If  the  two  houses  are 
in  difference  they  appoint  managers  or  representatives  and  they 
meet  and  agree  upon  something.  Either  one  side  yields  to  the 
other,  or  they  compromise  the  difference,  and  then  the  two  houses 
must  ratify  that  compromise.  And  then  that  becomes  a  final 
law. 

Mr.  C.  Nicoll. —  You  said  there  wTere  eight  committees  that 
made  appropriations.    What  are  they  ? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Why,  we  have  the  'Committee  on  Agri- 
culture which  has  the  agricultural  bill.  The  Committee  on 
Military  Affairs  has  the  army  bill ;  that  is  the  bill  for  the  support 
of  the  mobile  army,   and  has  the  military   academy  bill.      The 


Doc.  No.   15  34 

Naval  Committee  has  the  naval  bill.  The  Committee  on  Indian 
Affairs  has  the  bill  for  the  support  of  the  Indian  Service.  The 
Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs  has  the  Diplomatic  Service  bill  for 
the  support  of  diplomatic  and  consular  service.  The  Committee 
on  Appropriations  has  the  legislative,  executive  and  judicial,  all 
the  deficiency  bills,  the  District  of  Columbia  bill,  the  Sundry 
Civil  Appropriation  bill,  and  the  Pension  Appropriation  bill. 

The  Committee  on  Rivers  and  Harbors  appropriate  for  rivers 
and  harbors. 

Mr.  C.  Nicoll. —  And  the  public  buildings. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  I  think  those  are  the  eight. 

Mr.  C.  Nicoll. —  Well,  is  the  conference  between  you  all  ? 


Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Well,  what  happens  is  this :  The  estimates 
for  the  Naval  Establishment,  excepting  the  Naval  Establishment 
in  Washington,  that  is,  the  administrative  department,  go  to  the 
Committee  on  Naval  Affairs.  Well,  they  pay  no  attention  to 
how  much  revenue  we  are  going  to  have.  That  Committee  has 
jurisdiction  of  the  legislation  for  the  Navy.  Now,  if  they  rec- 
ommend and  pass  a  bill  to  extend  the  activities  in  some  way  of 
the  Navy  Department,  when  it  comes  to  recommend  money  to 
carry  out  the  service,  why,  they  are  in  sympathy  with  the  depart- 
ment head  as  to  the  amount  required.  The  Committee  on  Ap- 
propriations has  no  legislative  jurisdiction.  We  cannot  recom- 
mend any  legislation  of  any  kind.  We  only  can  consider  the 
estimates  for  money  for  some  service  which  is  authorized  by  law. 

Mr.  C.  Nicole. —  Don't  these  Committees  get  together  for 
the  purpose  of  making  their  appropriations  according  to  the 
revenues  ? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  No.  We  tried  it  informally,  to  get  the 
Chairman  of  these  Committees  together  and  agree,  but  every 
Committee  but  the  Committee  on  Appropriations,  insisted  that 
there  was  no  way  by  which  they  could  reduce  the  sums  appro- 
priated for  their  departments,  so  the  economies  had  to  be  effected 
by  the  Committee  on  Appropriations.  I  have  a  statement  which 
will  show  how  that  works  out    in   one   of   these   speechas.     I    put 


35  Doc.  No.   15 

those  figures  in.  This  is  a  statement  I  made  on  the  15th  of 
March  of  this  year. 

The  total  appropriations  made  in  the  seven  annual  appropria- 
tion acts  excluding  river  and  harbor  budgets,  because  they  are 
not  for  the  conduct  of  any  branch  of  the  service  and  prepared 
by  the  Committees  on  Agriculture,  Military  Affairs,  Foreign 
Affairs,  Naval  Affairs,  Indian  Affairs  —  Post  Office  and  Post 
Roads  was  the  other  Committee  —  respectively  for  the  four  year 
period  1913  to  1916,  amounted  to  $2,265,000,000;  for  the  cor- 
responding four  year  period  from  1909  to  1912  they  amounted 
to  $1,979,000,000,  an  increase  of  $286,000,000. 

Now,  the  estimates  submitted  for  the  period  1913  to  1916,  on 
which  they  were  based,  amounted  to  $2,264,000,000,  or  $11,- 
515,000  less  than  Congress  actually  appropriated.  Outside  com- 
mittees in  the  four  years  appropriated  for  those  departments 
$11,500,000'  more  than  the  departments  said  they  wanted. 

The  appropriations  made  in  the  fall  regular  appropriation 
not  including  the  Pension  Act,  and  including  all  deficiency  acts 
which  were  prepared  by  the  Committee  on  Appropriations, 
which  has  a  number  of  these  bills,  for  the  four  year  period  of 
1913  to  1916,  amounted  to  $718,000,000,  and  for  the  corre- 
sponding period  1909  to  1912,  to  $799,000,000,  a  reduction 
actually  made  during  the  latter  period  under  the  earlier  period 
of  $81,000,000,  or  about  ten  per  cent.  The  estimates  submitted 
to  Congress  during  the  period  1913  to  1916,  on  which  those  acts 
were  based,  amounted  to  $819,000,000,  or  $100,950,000  more 
than  Congress  actually  appropriated,  so  that  the  Committee  on 
Appropriations  in  the  four  years  recommended  appropriations 
in  the  bills  that  it  had  control  of  $100,000,000  less  than  the  de- 
partments asked  for,  while  these  other  Committees  combined 
made  them  $11,500,000  more  than  they  asked  for. 

Now,  I  can  give  you  an  expert's  explanation  o  fwhy  that  hap- 
pens. I  put  it  in  a  speech  I  had.  A  man  interested  in  the  de- 
partment was  complaining  that  the  service  in  which  he  was  in- 
terested did  not  get  liberal  appropriations  and  he  undertook  to 
show  why,  and  it  is  the  most  illuminating  statement  that  has  ever 
been  made. 

Dr.   Harlan   Updegraff,   of  the   Bureau   of  Education,   in  the 


Doc.  No.  15  36 

American  School  Board  Journal  of  May,  1912,  was  explaining 
the  failure  of  the  Bureau  of  Education  to  obtain  large  appropria- 
tions, and  he  said : 

"  If,  during  the  past  forty  years,  the  Commissioner  of  Educa- 
tion had  been  granted  lump-sum  appropriations  from  which  he 
could  have  paid  salaries  fairly  commensurate  with  those  paid  by 
local  public  and  private  agencies  throughout  the  United  States, 
and  had  it  been  possible  for  him  to  set  aside  proper  amounts  for 
traveling  expenses,  the  bureau  would  have  made  a  far  greater  im- 
press upon  educational  policy  and  practice.  In  consequence  of  the 
higher  appreciation  which  would  have  resulted,  it  is  also  quite 
probable  that  the  Congress  would  have  increased  its  appropriations 
from  year  to  year  until  their  magnitude  would  have  become  more 
nearly  commensurate  with  the  high  regard  in  which  all  Ameri- 
cans hold  their  public  schools. 

"  However,  there  is  an  underlying  cause  for  this  situation  in 
the  business  procedure  of  each  of  the  houses  of  Congress.  Under 
this  procedure  the  estimates  for  some  departments  are  acted  upon 
by  their  friends  at  court,  while  the  estimates  for  other  departments 
are  passed  on  by  a  tribunal  whose  main  object  is  economy.  All 
appropriation  bills  for  the  Department  of  Agriculture  are  pre- 
pared in  the  House  Committee  on  Agriculture,  and  are  reviewed 
in  the  Senate  by  the  Committee  on  Agriculture  and  Forestry. 
This  same  practice  also  holds  with  the  appropriations  for  the 
diplomatic  service,  the  military  service,  the  naval  service,  and  the 
postal  service.  On  the  other  hand,  the  appropriations  for  the 
other  branches  of  the  Executive  Department  are  prepared  by  the 
Committee  on  Appropriations  of  the  House  and  are  referred  by 
the  Senate  to  its  committee  of  like  name.  Quite  naturally  the  at- 
titude of  these  Committees  on  Appropriations  toward  the  esti- 
mates submitted  by  their  respective  branches  of  the  Executive  De- 
partment  is  distinctly  different  from  that  shown  by  the  committees 
which  recommend  the  appropriations  for  a  single  department  or 
bureau.  Members  of  the  latter  class  of  committees  have  their  at- 
tention centered  on  one  particular  set  of  governmental  activities, 
which  they  hold  in  growing  appreciation  as  their  knowledge  of 
the  wort  increase.  On  the  other  hand,  members  of  the  Com- 
mittees  on   Appropriations   have   their   attention    divided   among 


37  Doc.  No.  15 

several  departments  and  independent  offices  and  commissions,  all 
of  which  are  more  or  less  desirous  of  increased  funds.  Strong  at- 
tachment to  the  work  of  any  branch  of  the  government  service  is 
not  fostered  by  such  a  condition.  Moreover,  the  numerous  in- 
sistent demands  that  come  upon  them  develop  a  controlling  idea 
in  the  minds  of  those  Appropriations  Committees  —  not  the  great 
good  that  may  come  to  the  people  through  any  branch  of  the  serv- 
ice, but  rather  the  desirability  of  cutting  appropriations  to  the 
lowest  possible  limit  in  order  that  the  party  in  power  will  not  be 
held  accountable  for  large  expenditures.  In  brief,  all  the  appro- 
priations for  the  Department  of  Agriculture,  and  the  principal 
appropriations  for  the  War,  Navy  and  Post  Office  Departments, 
are  in  the  hands  of  their  friends,  while  those  of  the  remaining 
government  offices  must  come  before  a  tribunal,  the  chief  aim  of 
which  is  to  keep  the  total  appropriations,  including  those  framed 
by  the  special  committees,  within  certain  fixed  limits.  It  follows 
from  this  that  the  liberal  appropriations  recommended  by  the 
special  committees  have  a  tendency  to  lower  the  appropriations 
for  the  other  departments,  which  are  drawn  directly  by  the  Ap- 
propriations Committees.  Had  the  estimates  of  the  Commissioner 
of  Education  during  the  past  forty  years  been  referred  in  the 
House  to  the  Committee  on  Education  and  in  the  Senate  to  the 
Committee  on  Education  and  Labor  there  would  undoubtedly  be 
to-day  a  far  different  story  to  tell.  If  such  a  reform  in  the  pro- 
cedure of  the  House  could  be  carried  out  to-day,  an  increased 
participation  of  the  National  government  in  the  education  de- 
velopment of  the  country  would  probably  result." 

He  is  absolutely  correct,  if  the  appropriations  for  any  par- 
ticular department  of  the  government  were  confined  to  a  com- 
mittee that  had  to  appropriate  for  no  other  department  of  the 
government;  the  expenditures  were  greatly  increased,  and  that 
was  predicted  with  unerring  accuracy  in  1879.  In  that  period 
Mr.  Garfield  —  at  that  time  expenditures  of  the  Federal  govern- 
ment were  about  $300,000,000,  and  they  were  proposing  to  dis- 
tribute these  appropriation  bills.  And  Mr.  Garfield,  then,  in  the 
House  of  Representatives,  said: 

"  Let  me  state  that  the  proposition  to  divide  the  Committee 
on  Appropriations,  to  scatter  its  bills  as  suggested,  and  as  was 


Doc.  ]STo.  15  38 

once  moved,  indeed  is,  in  my  judgment,  although  I  think  it  is 
not  pending,  an  utterly  ridiculous  proposition,  I  believe  it  would 
cost  this  government  $20,000,000  if  the  appropriations  were 
scattered  to  the  several  committees.  *  *  *  I  do  say,  sir,  with- 
out the  slightest,  question  in  my  own  mind  of  the  truth  of  the 
.statement,  that  the  scattering  of  these  appropriations  as  suggested 
by  the  gentlemen  here  will  be  absolutely  breaking  down  all  econ- 
omy and  good  order  and  good  management  of  our  finances.  It 
can  not  be  otherwise." 

Those  predictions  were  borne  out  by  what  resulted  following 
the  distribution  in  1885.  And  the  same  result  followed  in  the 
Senate. 

Mr.  Pelletreau. —  May  I  ask  a  question  ?  If  the  introduc- 
tion of  all  bills  containing  an  appropriation  were  confined  to  the 
lower  House,  would  or  would  it  not  be  in  the  interests  of  the 
State  that  such  appropriation  be  not  increased  in  the  Senate? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  If  they  were  all  confined  to  one  body  ? 

Mr.  Pelletreau. —  If  the  introduction  were  confined  to  the 
lower  House. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  That  would  be  a  radical  departure  from  — 

Mr.  Pelletreau. —  Yes. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  from  the  underlying  theory  of  the  system 
of  government,  of  Federal  system,  of  State  government.  Our 
legislative  department  of  government  has  been  erected  upon  the 
theory  that  the  two  Houses  should  have  equal  legislative  powers, 
and  I  doubt  whether  — 

Mr.  Pelletreau. —  Wouldn't  that  stop  log  rolling  between  the 
lower  House  — 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  No,  I  think  not.  Where  that  is  in  forco, 
it  is  in  the  parliamentary  system  of  government  where  the  House 
of  Lords  now  cannot  do  very  much  with  the  supply  bills.  But 
the  overwhelming  controlling  reason  for  that  is  that  the  Commons 
directly  represent  the  people  and  the  minute  they  reject  the  im- 
portant proposals  of  the  government,  the  government  must  appeal 


39  Doc.   Xo.   15 

to  the  people.  It  makes  a  tremendous  difference  in  the  opera- 
tion of  the  two  systems  of  government.  And  I  think  one  of  the 
great  difficulties  that  has  been  encountered  in  the  attempts  that 
have  been  made  to  work  out  systems  that  will  improve  conditions 
in  our  country,  has  been  the  fact  that  too  many  of  those  that 
have  been  studying  and  proposing  these  changes,  have  become 
enamored  of  the  parliamentary  system,  or  the  system  in  vogue  in 
the  parliamentary  government.  They  are  trying  to  engraft  on 
our  system  conditions  irreconcilable  with  our  system  of  govern- 
ment. There  the  executive  department  is  so  intimately  related 
to  the  legislative  department  of  the  government,  and  it  is  so 
directly  responsive  to  the  will  of  the  country,  it  makes  a  big 
difference.  We  have  a  situation,  for  instance,  where  we  will  elect 
a  Governor  for  two  years  and  a  Senate  for  two  years,  and  we  may 
in  the  middle  of  his  term  change  the  political  complexion  of  the 
lower  body,  and  we  must  try  and  so  adjust  our  arrangements  as  to 
safeguard  against  an  absolute  deadlock,  and  under  these  circum- 
stances the  Assembly  might  refuse  to  recommend  appropriations 
that  properly  should  be  made.  Now,  the  Senate,  in  that  instance, 
would  be  the  safeguard,  because  it  would  compel  an  adjustment  by 
amendment. 

If  the  two  bodies  of  the  Legislature  were  politically  the  same, 
and  different  from  the  Executive  —  if  the  Legislature  refused 
to  make  the  appropriations  that  the  Executive  demanded,  believed 
essential,  it  would  be  easy  to  fix  responsibility  upon  one  of  the 
parties. 

But  we  might  have  that  situation  where  the  lower  body  would 
be  of  one  political  complexion  and  the  Executive  and  the  upper 
body  of  the  same  but  different  from  the  lower  body,  and  you  have 
a  very  unfortunate  condition  from  the  standpoint  of  the  public, 
however  pleasant  it  might  be  from  the  standpoint  of  a  man  active 
in  political  management.  I  think  that  what  we  should  try  to  do 
is  to  more  emphatically  fix  responsibility  for  the  initiation  upon 
the  Executive,  and  try  to  emphasize  to  the  Legislature  the  im- 
portance of  its  duties,  and  simply  put  the  checks  that  now  be- 
come necessary  upon  them. 

You  see,  when  we  consider  the  history  of  Anglo-Saxon  govern- 
ment the  Commons  were  never  granting  supplies  to  the  ■Crown 


Doc.  No.  15  40 

that  it  did  not  want.  There  was  a  continuous  struggle  on  the 
part  of  the  Crown  to  get  grants  from  the  people,  and  the  people 
to  secure  concessions  and  rights  from  the  Crown,  and  they  bar- 
tered one  thing  for  the  other.  The  Commons  would  not  give  the 
Crown  its  necessary  grant  of  supplies  unless  it  would  remedy 
certain  grievances.  We  have  not  that  situation.  Our  Legisla- 
tures are  not  trying  to  get  the  Executive  to  give  certain  redress 
to  the  country  or  certain  relief,  and  it  is  the  difficulty  of  trying 
to  take  a  system  based  upon  that  underlying  principle  of  govern- 
ment and  engraft  it  on  ours  which  is  so  different,  which  separates 
distinctly  and  completely  the  three  departments  of  government. 
What  should  be  done,  in  my  opinion,  is  taking  our  present  system, 
to  have  a  proper  appreciation  of  the  evils  that  have  grown  up, 
and  direct  remedies  to  the  correction  of  the  evils  that  have  grown 
up;  not  to  attempt  to  completely  reconstruct  a  new  system,  and 
tear  down  and  wipe  out  the  existing  one. 

Mr.  Wagner. —  I  was  going  to  ask  you  whether  you  believed 
that  the  other  elective  officers  of  the  State  should  also  be  dependent 
upon  the  judgment  of  the  Executive  as  to  the  appropriations  which 
they  asked  for. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Tnat  is  one  of  the  difficulties  that  arise 
under  our  present  State  government,  and  it  differentiates  this 
situation  completely  from  the  situation  in  the  Federal  government. 
In  the  Federal  government,  the  President  selects  the  heads  of  his 
departments,  and  it  is  his  administration.  Now,  under  our  exist- 
ing Constitution  and  present  ballot,  we  might  very  easily  have  an 
Executive  and  several  important  State  officials  belonging  each  to 
a  different  political  party. 

Mr.  Wagner. —  That  has  happened  recently  in  the  State. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Yes;  it  happened,  but  there  might  be — it 
would  be  more  easy  under  our  new  ballot.  Yon  might  have  a  man 
representing  either  political  party  in  the  State  government,  and 
that  is  one  of  the  difficulties  to  which  I  have  given  a  good  deal  of 
thought  to  try  and  work  out  a  solution.  We  always  make  a  mis- 
take as  soon  as  we  yield  to  this  suggestion  that  you  can  trust  the 
Executive.    Now,  that  is  the  common  expression  in  the  Legislative 


41  Doc.  No.   15 

body  when  you  want  to  make  a  recommendation.  You  can  trust 
the  Executive.  You  can't  do  it  safely.  I  am  not  talking  about  the 
particular  politics  of  any  man,  but  that  is  the  greatest  mistake 
that  is  made.  You  cannot  trust  the  man  to  forget  all  his  political 
skill  and  education  and  to  ignore  his  political  associates  and  his 
environment.  I  would  not  trust  any  Executive  any  further  than 
would  be  necessary.  I  would  mark  out  the  law  so  distinctly  that 
he  must  follow  it,  and  make  him  administer  that  law.  If  you  give 
him  wide  administrative  powers  and  as  you  do,  you  get  further  and 
further  away  from  our  whole  system  of  government,  and  the 
Federal  statutes  are  full  of  these  laws  regarding  estimates  and 
appropriations  and  submissions  due  entirely  to  the  fact  that  Con- 
gress has  inevitably  found  it  necessary  to  compel  the  Executive 
Department  of  the  government  to  follow  certain  definitely  laid 
down  lines. 

The  Chairman.—  The  point  of  that,  you  mean,  Mr.  Fitzgerald, 
is  that  if  an  attempt  was  made  to  carry  out  the  suggestions  that 
you  have  made  here  this  afternoon,  and  to  impose  upon  any  officer 
in  the  executive  the  responsibility  of  preparing  a  budget,  you  mean 
that  ought  to  be  done  so  precisely  as  to  make  it  his  duty  and  to 
leave  no  possibility  of  discretion. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Yes,  and  what  I  say  about  trusting  the  Ex- 
ecutive was  this:  Just  for  the  sake  of  argument,  suppose  you 
had  a  Republican  Governor,  a  Democratic  Comptroller  and  a 
Progressive  or  some  other  Attorney-General,  and  the  Governor 
alone,  under  our  system  had  the  right  to  submit  the  estimates  for 
the  moneys  required  to  administer  the  public  service.  No  man 
is  sufficiently  superhuman,  under  those  conditions,  to  be  able  to 
forget  that  the  Comptroller  is  a  Democrat  and  not  a  Republican, 
and  the  Attorney-General  is  not  a  Republican,  or  whichever  it 
would  happen  to  be.  And  he  would  not  be  in  the  same  close  com- 
munity of  relationship  and  touch,  the  same  notions,  and  he  might, 
by  his  action,  and  the  restraint  you  put  upon  the  Legislature, 
vitally  cripple  the  Comptroller's  Department  in  the  performance 
of  very  important  functions. 

So  that  under  our  system  that  problem  arises  as  to  the  origin 
of  the  estimates. 


Doc.  No.  15  42 

Not  that  I  mean  that  men  who  become  public  officials  are  in  any 
way  degenerate,  but  the  fact  is  that  a  man  who  is  a  public  official 
is  human  all  the  time.  It  is  not  as  easy  to  reconcile  men  of  differ- 
ent political  faiths,  as  to  the  appropriateness  of  certain  things  in 
different  departments  under  different  men. 

The  Chairman. —  You  realize  one  of  the  problems  before  the 
Convention  is  the  very  question  whether  we  should  not  change  that 
system  so  that  it  would  make  these  different  elective  officers  ap- 
pointive, and  avoid  this  very  possibility  of  divergence  you  have 
just  spoken  of.  Is  it  your  opinion  that  the  two  questions  would 
interlock  that  question  with  the  budget  question  somewhat  ? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Well,  no.  I  would  not  like  to  express  that. 
I  have  read  something  of  the  history  of  the  State  of  New  York. 
and  concentration  of  the  power  of  appointment,  and  I  have  such 
positive  views  that  I  don't  think  I  ought  to  interject, 

Mr.  I).  Nicole. —  What  difficulty  is  there  in  a  Eepublican 
Governor  and  a  Democratic  Comptroller  or  Attorney-General  on 
the  board  to  make  a  budget?  They  are  all  engaged  in  trying  to 
administer  the  government  economically. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  The  very  point  of  objection,  Mr.  Nicoll, 
is  this :  That  you  diffuse  responsibility  and  power.  If  the  system 
could  be  worked  out  where  the  Executive  had  to  stand  out  before 
the  people  of  the  State  as  the  man  responsible  primarily  for  the 
fiscal  condition  of  the  State,  you  would  have  a  situation  then 
where  if  the  people  were  grossly  dissatisfied,  you  would  know 
whom  to  hold  responsible. 

Mr.  D.  Nicole. —  The  Board  of  Estimate  in  the  city  of  New 
York  under  Gaynor's  administration  was  composed  of  different 
parties,  and  it  often  has  been,  don't  you  know? 

The  Chairman. —  It  has  raised  considerable  difficulty. 

Mr.  Nicole, —  Yes,  but  they  worked  something  out  of  it. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  But  they  usually,  the  public  at  least,  the 
city  of  New  York,  usually  see  the  Mayor  more  than  anybody  else. 
whether  he  is  the  responsible  person  or  not. 


43  Doc.  No.   15 

Mr.  Wagner. —  Under  our  present  system,  isn't  the  Governor 
in  the  end  responsible  for  the  appropriations  ?  He  has  under 
our  law  the  right  to  veto  any  particular  item  of  the  appro- 
priation bill,  any  small  or  large  item,  so  that  in  the  end  he  is  the 
final  judge  of  the  appropriation  and  supply  bill,  and  I  was  wonder- 
ing what  difference  you  thought  it  made  whether  he,  in  initiating 
the  appropriations,  exercised  his  veto  power,  or  in  the  end,  that  is, 
after  both  houses  of  the  Legislature  have  acted  upon  it,  and 
then  he  used  his  veto  power.  He  exercises  the  power  you  propose 
to  give  him  now  in  the  end.  You  simply  want  him  to  have  the 
power  in  the  beginning.  I  was  wondering  what  difference  that 
would  make.     The  responsibility  is  the  same,  as  I  see  it. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  It  makes  it  in  this  way :  That  in  order 
that  a  legislative  body  should  do  its  work  intelligently,  or  more  in- 
telligently and  with  better  results,  it  should  have,  when  it  starts,  a 
concrete,  definite  proposal  of  what  is  required  for  the  various  de- 
partments and  what  the  sources  of  revenues  to  meet  those  ex- 
penditures are.  And  if  you  don't  have  that  at  the  beginning,  you 
may  be  lucky  enough  to  hit  things  so  that  they  fit.  But  you  get 
much  better  results  if  you  could  have  that  all  in  advance.  The 
problem  to  get  that,  to  prevent  it  being  juggled  at  the  outset  and 
then  added  to,  is  one  of  the  things  — 

Mr.  Wagner. — The  difficulty,  I  think,  the  financial  com- 
mittes  of  the  Legislature  in  the  past  has  had,  is  the  lack  of 
knowledge  as  to  the  desirability  or  at  least  the  necessity  of  appro- 
priations. Now,  supposing  the  power  of  making  a  preliminary  in- 
quiry was  given  to  the  Comptroller  or  the  Secretary  of  the  Treas- 
ury, as  you  have  in  the  Federal  government,  if  he  were  an  elective 
officer,  so  that  he  would  not  be  one  of  the  Cabinet  members,  then 
the  question  of  his  superiority  would  not  arise.  But  here  is  a 
Comptroller  and  elective  officer  directly  responsible  to  the  people. 
Supposing  the  power  was  given  to  him  to  make  an  original  inquiry 
into  all  the  appropriations  asked  for,  and  to  transmit  a  report  for 
the  necessity  for  the  appropriations,  and  his  opinion  and  all  the 
facts,  to  the  legislative  body,  and  upon  that  the  Legislature  is  to 
make  its  appropriations  finally  and  then  after  that  the  Governor 
would  again  have  the  final  veto  power. 


Doc.  Eo.   15  44 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Well,  in  the  Federal  system  we  work  it  a 
little  differently,  in  that  after  the  estimates  are  submitted,  the 
heads  of  the  departments  and  heads  of  the  bureaus  are  subjected 
to  a  pretty  thorough  examination  as  to  the  necessity.  For  instance, 
in  the  last  session  of  Congress,  the  Committee  on  Appropriations 
took  5,000  printed  pages  of  testimony,  and  they  got  pretty  accurate 
information.  Anyone  who  has  had  anything  to  do  with  it  knows 
that  if  there  was  some  independent  source  of  power,  or  body  that 
could  investigate  along  certain  lines,  it  would  be  a  great  help.  For 
instance,  it  is  very  difficult  for  a  committee  of  a  legislative  body  to 
know,  if  it  is  proposed  to  spend  $300,000  for  an  addition  to  a 
hospital,  whether  $300,000  would  be  the  proper  sum,  or  $100,000 
would  not  be  amine.  And  if  there  were  some  place,  a  competent 
independent  corps,  which  would  first  sift  these  various  proposals 
and  collate  such  information  as  would  be  valuable,  it  would  be  of 
immense  help.  From  time  to  time  it  has  been  proposed  in  Wash- 
ington that  there  should  be  attached  to  the  Committee  on  Appro- 
priations a  permanent  force  which  would  have  the  power  to  con- 
tinually make  investigations  in  the  various  departments  and  collate 
information  for  the  Committee. 

Mr.  Wagner. —  Just  the  things  you  have  just  mentioned.  The 
Department  of  Efficiency  and  Economy  which  unfortunately  in 
my  judgment,  was  abolished  as  a  department,  that  department 
was  a  very  effective  instrument  in  getting  just  that  sort  of  informa- 
tion to  the  Legislature,  which  it  could  not  get  in  any  other  way, 
and  it  discovered  that  a  number  of  requests  made  for  hospitals, 
for  instance,  were  absolutely  unnecessary ;  in  one  case  where  they 
asked  for  the  equipment,  although  the  plans  had  not  even  been 
drawn  for  the  construction  of  the  buildings,  and  other  extrava- 
gant demands  which  could  not  have  been  discovered  by  a  mere 
asking  of  questions  of  the  head  of  the  hospital  because  they  always 
have  ways  of  justifying  it,  "But  the  Commissioner  of  Efficiency 
and  Economy  sent  inspectors  around,  and  in  that  way  they  gut  first 
hand  information,  which  was  of  great  assistance  to  the  Legislature, 
and  T  think  at  the  present  time  what  is  needed  more  than  anything 
else  is  just  that  sort  of  information. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  I  think  one  of  the  things  that  are  perhaps 
most  difficult  at  times  in  Congress  is  for  men  to  bo  able  to  deter- 


45  Doc.  No.  15 

mine  just  what  ought  to  be  done  about  certain  matters,  due  en- 
tirely to  inability  to  obtain  information  of  the  character  that 
ought  to  be  had.  Sometimes  it  becomes  very  largely  a  guess,  which 
is  often  resolved  largely  upon  the  personality  of  the  head  of  a  de- 
partment, if  a  man  has  so  impressed  himself  upon  the  Committee 
that  it  is  inclined  to  give  him  the  benefit  of  the  doubt  in  situations 
where  they  assume  that  personal  equation  decides  it.  Others, 
where  the  committee  for  one  reason  or  another  is  distrustful,  why 
that  may  determine  the  refusal  to  grant  something  that  perhaps 
should  be  done.  But  that  is  a  detail,  the  working  out  of  which 
is  dependent  somewhat  on  the  other.  There  is  no  doubt  that  the 
most  effective  thing  to  keep  an  administrative  officer  legitimately 
in  check  in  the  expenditure  of  money  is  the  fact  that  what  is  done 
is  checked  up  afterwards. 

I  have  not  any  doubt  that  from  at  least  ten  to  fifteen  million 
dollars  has  been  saved  in  the  construction  of  the  Panama  Canal 
as  a  result  of  the  policy  that  was  initiated.  Mr.  Taft  was  Secre- 
tary of  War  when  General  Goethals  was  put  in  charge  of  the  work, 
and  they  requested  the  Committee  on  Appropriations  to  visit  the 
Canal  Zone,  and  personally  investigate  what  was  being  done,  and 
take  the  testimony  on  the  zone,  and  they  have  been  down  there 
every  year  but  one  year,  and  both  General  Goethals,  and  those  who 
are  intimately  acquainted  with  what  was  done,  are  of  that  opinion, 
that  that  effective  close  investigation  and  check  has  resulted  in  the 
elimination  of  waste  and  cutting  off  of  things  that  saved  about 
$15,000,000. 

Mr.  Schubman. —  I  wanted  to  ask  if  I  understood  you  aright 
in  saying  that  for  the  Federal  government,  with  its  unitary  execu- 
tive departments,  you  believe  it  would  be  an  advantageous  reform 
if  some  such  method  of  preparing  the  budget  were  adopted,  as  that 
prescribed  in  the  law  of  the  Confederate  States,  extracts  from 
which  you  read  ? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Oh,  I  think  I  have  several  times  expressed 
the  opinion  in  the  House  of  representatives  that  the  power  to 
initiate  expenditures  should  be  considerably  curtailed ;  that  is,  the 
individual  initiative,  and  I  think  that  is  important. 


Doc.  No.  15  46 

Mr.  Schurman. —  That  clause,  as  I  understood  it  —  they  pro- 
vided that  the  executive  departments  should  submit  estimates 
to  the  Confederate  legislature. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Provided  that  the  departments  could  not 
appropriate  money  unless  submitted  by  the  President  or  the 
heads  of  departments  except  by  a  two-thirds  vote. 

Mr.  Schueman. —  Now,  would  you  say  that  would,  be  a  wise 
measure  of  reform,  for  Congress,  for  the  United  States,  would 
you  think  that  a  wise  policy  to  adopt  in  a  State  if  the  State  also 
had  a  unitary  executive  department  ? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Well,  of  course,  my  experience  has  been 
limited  to  the  Federal  government,  and  I  am  not  sufficiently  in- 
formed as  to  the  detailed  operations  of  the  Legislature,  to  ex- 
press an  intelligent  opinion.  I  speak  from  my  own  experience 
and  knowledge  in  the  other  field,  but  it  differs,  the  procedure 
differs  radically,  I  am  quite  certain,  in  this  State  and  in  Wash- 
ington. 

Mr.  Schueman. —  I  understand  that ;  I  understood  that.  I 
was  trying  to  follow  you. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  I  have  not  the  slightest  hesitation  in  say- 
ing that  much  better  result  would  be  obtained  if  the  individual 
in  the  two  houses  of  Congress  could  not  initiate  expenditure  by 
increasing  the  amount  proposed  by  the  Executive,  or  proposing 
expenditures  that  the  Executive  did  not  wish,  but  I  would  not 
make  that  absolutely  impossible,  but  would  make  it  so  difficult, 
and  loading  him  down,  that  it  would  only  be  done  under  the  most 
peculiar  and  extraordinary  circumstances. 

Mr.  Schurman. —  I  should  think,  then,  if  we  had  a  State  with 
a  unitary  executive  department,  the  chances  are  that  that  would 
also  be  a  good  measure  of  reform,  bo  begin  with  \ 

Air.  Fitzgerald. —  In  the  State  government,  you  have  to 
have  a  check  on  that,  that  we  have  not  in  the  Federal  govern- 
ment, the  veto  power  of  the  Governor  over  the  item  in  the  appro- 
priation bill.  If  the  Legislature  puts  something  in  the  Supply 
or  Appropriation  bill  that  is  not  asked,  the  Governor  has  the  veto 
power.     We  do  not  have  that  in  the  Federal  government. 


47  Doc.  No.   15 

Mr.  Schukman. —  I  was  impressed  with  what  you  said  about 
the  importance  of  the  Legislature  having  the  Governor's  opinion 
in  advance. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Well,  I  think  that  is  true.  The  man  that 
is  to  appropriate  the  money  ought  to  know  the  opinion  of  those 
who  administer  the  service,  as  to  what  is  needed  and  how  it 
should  be  expended  because  without  that  information  they  are 
not  in  a  position  to  determine.  Then  when  that  is  explained 
they  decide  just  what  they  will  or  will  not  permit  the  admin- 
istrative department  to  do. 

Mr.  Parsons. —  Would  you  approve  in  the  Federal  govern- 
ment that  the  Cabinet  officers  have  seats  in  Congress  ? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  I  am  not  in  sympathy  with  that  and  I 
don't  think  it  would  be  very  advantageous.  I  think  the  best 
article  ever  written  favoring  that  was  written  by  President  Wil- 
son in  about  1882  or  1883,  in  a  magazine;  I  think  it  is  known 
as  the  Overland  Monthly  or  Overland  Journal.  He  advocated 
that  very  thoroughly.  But  I  don't  see  how  it  would  help.  jSTow, 
this  is  what  would  happen  if  we  gave  the  members  of  the  Cabinet 
a  seat  in  the  House  of  Representatives.  The  Secretary  of  War 
to-day,  for  instance,  would  prepare  an  elaborate  speech  in  favor 
of  what  he  believed  to  be  desirable  reforms  in  the  Army.  And  he 
would  have  the  stage  all  set  and  the  speech  on  the  wires  and  set 
up  on  the  boards  throughout  the  country.  And  he  would  go  to 
the  House  of  Representatives  and  make  a  speech  advocating  his 
side  of  the  question  that  would  get  a  publicity  that  would  be 
unique  and  nobody  who  answered  him  would  be  given  any  atten- 
tion whatever,  and  it  would  be  the  most  effective  way  for  Execu- 
tive coercion  and  domination  that  could  be  urged  in  the  Legisla- 
ture of  the  county.  Where  the  Cabinet  members  have  a  seat  in 
the  legislative  body,  you  see  their  position  is  so  different.  They 
are  like  the  chairman  of  a  committee  who  had  a  bill.  When  the 
House  of  Commons  resolves  itself  into  the  committee  on  supply 
and  they  reach  the  estimate  of  the  War  Department,  the  Secretary 
of  War  is  in  charge,  associated  with  the  Chancellor  of  the  Ex- 
chequer of  that  portion  of  the  budget,  and  then  he  is  grilled  and 
hammered,  and  if  a  proposal  is  made  to  strike  out  a  certain  grant, 


Doc.  J\To.  15  48 

lie  must  defend  it,  and  if  it  is  an  important  matter  and  lie  is  de- 
feated, lie  submits  his  resignation,  or  it  might  be  sufficiently  im- 
portant to  compel  the  whole  government  to  go  out;  but  just  to 
give  these  members  of  the  Cabinet  a  right  to  come  in  and  lecture 
and  browbeat  and  overawe  and  develop  public  opinion  so  as  to 
coerce  the  Legislature,  we  have  enough  of  that  already  and  we 
would  not  get  anything  effective.  He  would  have  the  sole  right 
as  a  member  of  the  House,  and  if  somebody  asked  a  question 
that  it  would  be  embarrassing  to  answer,  he  would  exercise  the 
right  of  a  member  of  the  House  and  decline  to  yield. 

Mr.  Parsons. —  In  regard  to  your  suggestion  of  having  the 
Executive  prepare  the  appropriation  bill,  what  would  you  think 
of  having  the  officer  there  to  answer  questions  ? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  He  doesn't  prepare  the  appropriation  bills. 
He  does  in  the  parliamentary  system.  He  prepares  the  appro- 
priation bill  and  he  brings  it  in  and  must  put  it  through,  but 
with  us  he  doesn't  prepare  the  appropriation  bill. 

Mr.  Parsons. —  But  supposing  he  did,  as  you  suggested  — 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. — Then  you  completely  revolutionize  our 
system  of  government.  You  are  intermingling  the  Executive 
and  the  legislative  branch,  and  you  are  breaking  down  one  of 
those  divisions  we   consider   essential. 

The  Chairman. —  I  think  what  Mr.  Parsons  suggested  was 
this:  Suppose  with  a  view  to  making  the  estimates  which  you 
just  stated  were  apt  now  to  be  so  high  and  irresponsible,  suppose 
Congress  assumed  the  power  to  call  the  head  of  the  department 
in,  whose  estimate  it  was,  and  to  ask  him  questions  in  public  on 
it,  what  effect  do  yon  think  that  would  have  upon  the  future  re- 
sponsibility of  the  officer  in  making  similar  estimates? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  T  don't  think  it  would  lie  effective.  I  have 
sat  for  sixteen  years  in  committees  where  five  men  have  tried  to 
get  information  out  of  members  of  the  Cabinet. 

The  Chairman. —  That  was  not  in  public. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  It  does  not  make  much  difference.  You 
would  have  434  men  in  the  House,  and  any  one  of  them  had  a 


49  Doc.  No.  15 

right  to  question  this  man.  It  is  absolutely  impossible  for  more 
than  one  man  to  conduct  an  intelligent  and  illuminative  examina- 
tion merely  by  the  asking  of  a  question  at  random  here  and  there. 
I  think  the  Secretary  has  seen  copies  of  hearings  in  Congress  —  I 
have  —  where  ten  or  twelve  men  would  sit  — 

The  Chairman. —  I  have  been  before  committees,  but  the 
trouble  is  they  are  all  secret. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  and  the  Secretary  would  be  asked  a  question 
and  somebody  would  suggest  that  was  not  fair,  and  somebody  else 
would  intervene  and  there  would  be  three  or  four  printed  pages  of 
controversy  between  the  members  of  the  Committee,  and  then  you 
would  find  a  place  where  the  Secretary  would  say,  "  Well,  gentle- 
men, I  have  prepared  a  written  statement  which  fully  explains  this 
matter,  and  with  your  permission,  I  will  put  it  in  the  record,"  and 
that  is  the  extent  of  the  examination.  Now,  in  the  Committee  on 
Appropriations  the  arrangement  is  a  little  different ;  by  long  prac- 
tice, which  has  become  fixed,  ivorking  with  sub-committees  of  five 
a  person  who  is  called 'upon  to  give  information,  is  questioned  by 
the  chairman,  and  he  conducts  the  investigation  with  slight  inter- 
ruption until  he  has  completed  his  investigation,  and  then  any 
other  member  of  the  committee  who  wishes  to  bring  out  addi- 
tional information  questions.  But  you  could  not  bring  a  member 
of  the  Cabinet  into  the  House  of  Eepresentatives  and  go  through 
that.     It  takes  sometimes  three  or  four  days  in  the  Committee. 

The  Chairman. —  My  suggestion  is  that  possibly  the  fact  that 
such  an  examination  was  public  would  make  the  head  of  the  de- 
partment better  prepared. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  They  are  all  printed.  It  doesn't  have  any 
effect  on  them,  and  the  advantage  of  the  man  who  has  the  floor  in 
the  legislative  body  over  the  unfortunate  individual  who  tries  to 
ask  him  questions  is  so  great  that  that  would  be  the  most  enjoyable 
part  of  the  day's  work  for  the  member  of  the  Cabinet,  to  come 
down  and  show  the  members  of  the  legislative  body  how  very  little 
they  did  know.  And  it  would  get  so  that  it  would  be  only  the  un- 
usual crank  or  pestiferous  individual  who  would  have  the  temerity 
to  question  the  head  of  the  department,  because  nobody  wishes, 


Doc.  No.  15  50 

unless  his  skin  is  pretty  thick  or  he  had  reached  that  stage  where 
he  doesn't  Appreciate  it,  to  be  humiliated  by  smart  answers  of 
some  one,  or  by  the  asking  of  a  question  which  can  be  answered  in 
such  a  way  that  the  mere  manner  in  which  it  is  answered,  although 
the  language  is  not  offensive,  is  so  completely  demoralizing  to  the 
questioner  that  he  subsides.  And  then  again,  very  frequently  in 
these  investigations,  even  the  best  tempered  men  like  myself  have 
our  tempers  ruffled  in  the  committee  room  and  the  clashes  are  very 
keen  and  usually  adjusted,  but  some  of  them  would  precipitate  a 
riot  if  they  occurred  in  the  House  of  Representatives. 

Another  thing  would  be,  that  after  the  novelty  of  the  thing 
wore  off,  why,  you  could  not  get  a  corporal's  guard  to  hear  the 
great  majority  of  the  members  of  the  Cabinet  answer  questions  in 
the  House.  A  baseball  game  would  break  the  meeting  up  for  lack 
of  a  quorum.  And  it  comes  down  to  this :  That  a  great  body  is  in- 
effective to  do  that  detail  work,  and  it  must  be  done  by  a  compara- 
tively few  persons  who  will  concentrate  to  do  their  work. 

Now,  if  a  member  of  a  Cabinet  brought  in  an  appropriation 
bill,  and  had  charge  of  the  bill,  and  was  questioned  on  the  floor, 
and  reached  an  item,  and  a  motion  was  made  to  strike  out  the 
paragraph,  for  he  is  not  in  a  position  to  brusquely  refuse  to  an- 
swer questions,  must  justify  that  or  have  it  voted  out  on  him 
yon  have  an  entirely  different  proposition. 

But  just  to  make  the  statements,  I  have  known  members  of  the 
Cabinet  who  would  paint  such  a  glowing  picture  in  the  estimates 
they  would  present,  and  then  escape  from  any  real  questioning  or 
investigation  that  I  think  the  result  would  be  worse  than  at 
present, 

Mr.  Parsons. —  Presumably  you  would  have  the  examination 

by  the  Committee  first.  But  doesn't  it  sometimes  happen  in  the 
House  of  Representatives  that  there  is  a  difference  of  opinion 
between  the  members  of  the  Committee  and  other  members  of 
the  House  as  to  just  what  the  Cabinet  officers  did  mean,  and  in 
those  circumstances  wouldn't  the  House  be  aided  by  having  the 
Cabinet  officer  there  to  be  heard  in  response  to  questions  by  the 
whole  House? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Well,  I  have  known  that  to  happen,  that 
members  of  a  Committee  were  under  suspicion  of  attempting  to 


51  Doc.  No.   15 

do  something  detrimental  to  the  public  service.  Probably  I 
have  been  in  that  position  myself,  but  I  know  that  some  men 
have  complained  that  certain  examinations  in  the  Committee  on 
Appropriations  reminded  them  of  a  criminal  being  cross-examined 
by  his  own  attorney  and  the  judge,  as  well  as  the  prosecuting 
officer;  but  it  has  always  been  under  circumstances  where  the 
members  of  the  Committee  radically  differed  with  the  head  of 
the  department  or  attempted  to  obtain  information  which  they 
believe  exists,  and  that  the  member  of  the  department  is  reluctant 
to  give. 

Mr.  Parsons. —  I  didn't  mean  to  suggest  the  Committee  was 
under  suspicion. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  It  is  a  fact,  though. 

Mr.  Parsoxs. —  I  didn't  mean  to  suggest  that.  It  is  very  diffi- 
cult sometimes  for  a  person  who  had  not  been  in  the  Committee 
to  find  out  just  what  the  Cabinet  officer  had  intended.  You  men- 
tioned a  moment  ago  that  a  great  many  questions  would  be  asked, 
and  finally  the  thing  would  be  cleared  up  by  a  written  statement 
he  would  present.  Sometimes  he  has  not  written  a  statement,  and 
you  have  to  make  up  your  mind  as  to  what  he  meant  from  the 
hearing  as  printed.     And  it  is  very  difficult  at  times. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  Of  course,  if  the  object  is  to  make  it  cer- 
tain that  a  head  of  a  department  will  get  all  the  money  he  thinks 
he  ought  to  have,  that  will  help  him  very  materially.  But  that 
is  not  the  evil  that  every  one  complains  of.  In  spite  of  all  the 
supposed  handicaps  under  which  the  department  labors,  our  ex- 
penditures every  one  concedes  are  excessive,  greater  than  they 
should  be.  Now,  if  you  permit  the  head  of  the  department  in  ad- 
dition to  all  the  other  ways  he  has  of  influencing  the  members  of 
committees  in  Congress  to  come  in  on  the  floor  of  the  House  un- 
der conditions  in  which  he  is  able  to  create  a  public  opinion, 
whether  correct  or  incorrect,  in  order  to  do  what  ?  In  order  to 
defeat  the  recommendations  of  a  Committee  that  is  trying  to 
protect  the  public  treasury.  That  is  the  only  thing.  That  is 
what  it  is.  No  one  suggests  it  is  necessary  in  Congress  for  the 
head  of  the  department  to  come  in,  in  order  to  get  the  things  the 


Doc.  No.  15  52 

Committee  recommends;  but  it  is  to  help  him  to  get  the  things 
the  Committee  refuses  to  recommend.  By  the  time  they  got 
finished,  there  would  not  be  much  left  to  distribute. 

Mr.  Pelletreau. —  Mr.  Fitzgerald,  if  the  Governor  should  be 
clothed  with  the  power  to  submit  a  statement  to  the  Legislature, 
wouldn't  it  be  wise  that  there  be  an  official  or  bureau  performing 
the  functions  of  Commissioner  of  Efficiency  and  Economy,  I 
think  it  was  called,  under  the  control  of  the  Governor,  appointed 
by  him,  and  answerable  to  him  ? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  No ;  I  should  take  it  away  from  the  Gov- 
ernor. It  ought  to  be  independent.  It  ought  to  be  for  the  benefit 
of  the  legislative  body,  not  the  administrative  body.  They  have 
all  the  knowledge  and  sources  of  information  they  need.  What 
is  needed,  if  anything  is  needed,  are  independent  means  of  infor- 
mation for  the  legislative  body.  That  has  been  the  experience 
I  have  had  in  the  Federal  government. 

Mr.  Pelletreau. —  Then  I  understand  you  to  say  there  should 
be  such  an  official  or  bureau  — 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  No ;  I  say  anything  that  aids  in  furnishing 
information  —  the  experience  in  Congress  is  that  it  would  very 
materially  help  the  committees  in  Congress  if  there  was  some 
force  or  body  responsible  and  answerable  to  the  House  that  would 
obtain  information  independently;  not  that  the  departments  and 
the  men  in  them  are  dishonest,  but  there  is  frequently  room  for 
a  very  wide  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  advisability  or 
propriety  of  doing  a  thing  one  way  or  another,  and  the  most 
effective  check  is  the  obtaining  of  information  from  independent 
sources. 

The  Chairman. —  Don't  feel  that  you  must  stand  up,  Mr. 
Fitzgerald,  you  have  been  standing  a  long  time. 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  I  just  as  soon  stand. 

Mr.  Schurman. —  Have  you  some  extra  copies  of  that  speech  ? 

Mr.  Fitzgerald. —  I  have  promised  to  send  some  to  the  Chair- 
man. 

The  Chairman. —  What  is  that  ? 


53  Doc.  No.  15 

Mr.   Fitzgerald. —  I   said  I   would  send  you  some  of  those 


The  Chairman. —  I  hope  you  will.  We  will  be  very  glad  to 
get  them. 

Have  any  of  the  members  of  the  committee  any  further  ques- 
tions to  ask  Mr.  Fitzgerald  ? 

I  am  sure  that  I  voice  the  sentiments  of  every  member  of  the 
Committee  in  telling  you,  Mr.  Fitzgerald,  that  we  are  very  much 
obliged  to  you  for  coming  and  for  what  you  have  told  us  in  refer- 
ences to  the  operations  of  the  Federal  Congress,  and  I  feel 
certain  it  will  be  of  great  usefulness  in  the  deliberations  of  the 
Committee. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.    16 


REPLY  OF  THE  ATTORNEY- GENERAL  TO 
RESOLUTION  OF  THE  CONVENTION 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 

Office  of  the  Attorney-General 

Albany,  June  24,  1915 

Hon.  Elihu  Root,  President  of  the  Constitutional  Convention, 
Capitol,  Albany,  N.  Y.: 

Dear  Sir. —  Some  time  ago  there  was  transmitted  to  this 
department  a  copy  of  the  resolution  of  the  Constitutional 
Convention : 

"  That  the  Attorney-General  be  requested  to  furnish  to  this 
Convention,  with  all  convenient  speed,  the  following  infor- 
mation relative  to  matters  pending  before  the  Court  of 
Claims : 

"  1.  The  number  of  claims  pending,  classified  by  the 
years  in  which  the  claims  were  filed. 

"  2.  The  amount  involved  in  the  claims  so  filed,  also  classi- 
fied by  years. 

"  3.  The  number  of  claims  adjusted  without  recourse  to 


Doc.  No.  16  2 

the  Court  of  Claims  or  Board  of  Claims  in  each  year  of  the 
last  five  years. 

"  4.  The  total  amount  paid  by  the  State  in  satisfaction  of 
claims  in  each  year  of  the  last  five  years. 

"  5.   The  geographical    distribution    of    pending    claims, 
stated  by  counties. 

"  6.  A   classification   of  pending  claims  by  number  and 
amount  involved,  showing: 

"  a.   Claims    arising    from    appropriations    made   by    the 
State  in  the  course  of  the  Barge  canal  improvement. 

"  b.  Cases  on  contract  growing  out  of  the  Barge  canal 

improvement." 

Accompanied  you  will  please  find  charts   (by  counties)   upon 

which  are  registered  the  number  of  pending  claims  classified  by 

years,  the  nature  of  the  claims  and  the  amount  claimed  up  to 

May  1,  1915. 

You  will  also  find  charts  showing  the  classification  of  claims 
by  counties,  the  character  of  claims  by  counties,  the  number  of 
claims  and  the  amount  claimed  as  of  all  claims  now  pending  in 
the  Court  of  Claims  in  the  State  as  a  whole. 

The  resolution  requested  classification  of  pending  claims  by 
number  and  amount,  showing  claims  arising  from  appropriations 
and  because  of  contracts  in  connection  with  the  Barge  canal 
improvement.  The  data  furnished  not  only  shows  this  character 
of  information  concerning  the  Barge  canal,  but  concerning  the 
old  canal  and  other  classifications  which  are  enumerated  here- 
inafter, viz. : 

OLD  CANAL:  Number  Amount 

A.  Leakage  and  overflow 66  $97,247  65 

B.  Damage 3  4,876  00 

C.  Claims,  services 120  27,000  28 

Total,  old  canal 189  $128,623  93 


Barge  Canal: 

A.  Permanent  appropriations 865  $51,086,312  78 

B.  Water  rights    38  3,205,719  25 

C.  Leakage  and  overflow 662  1,017,012  41 


3  Doc.  No.  16 

Number  Amount 

D.  Contracts   37  $3,570,342  77 

E.  Negligence 151  565,554  34 

F.  Pollution,  streams    2  42,515  71 

G.  Closing   navigation    2  61,102  30 

H.  Damage  to  boats 13  16,510  95 

Total,  Barge  canal 1,770       $59,565,070  51 

Total,  both  canals 1,959        $59,693,694  44 

Highways  : 

A.  Contracts 22  $698,740  10 

B.  Damage 5  14,635  00 

C.  Highway  damage 2  11,462  26 

D.  Pro  rate  bond  tax 1  122  00 

E.  Permanent   appropriation....  1  150  00 

Total,  highways 31  $725,109  36 

State  Reservations  : 

A.  Permanent  appropriations   ...  7  $294,052  00 

B.  Use  of  land  and  water 1  400  00 

C.  Appropriation,  timber 2  82,053   17 

D.  Damage  by   animals 8  3,270  27 

Total,    State   reservations, 

Miscellaneous  Claims  : 

A.  Negligence 

B.  Contract 

C.  Damage 

D.  Excise 

E.  Salaries,  employees    

F.  Loss  of  property    

G.  Failure  to  deliver  goods  bought 

at  public  sale 1  82  50 


18 

$379,775  44 

79 

$495,246  66 

22 

638,073  19 

14 

90,771  03 

1 

11,460  00 

9 

19,094  82 

1 

200  00 

Doc.  No.  16 


Number  Amount 

H.  County  taxes  on  railway  bonds  5  $20,407  84 

I.    Taxes 2  4,922  64 

J.  Kef u  nd  of  money  occasioned 
by  erroneous  affixture  of 
stock  transfer  stamps 297  605,097  66 

K.  Refund  of  money  erroneously 
deposited  by  county  treas- 
urer. Kings  county   1  3,485  35 


Total,  miscellaneous  claims       432  $1,888,837   19 


The  classification  above  stated  is  particularly  set  out  as  to  tbe 
individual  character  of  claims  in  accordance  with  the  resolution, 
by  counties,  each  county,  as  stated  above,  carrying  all  the  infor- 
mation under  a  .separate  pamphlet.  For  the  purpose  of  explana- 
tion, however,  it  would  suffice  to  state  that  the  general  classifi- 
cations referred  to  above  furnishes  the  following  information : 

No.  of 

claims  Amount 

Old  Canai 189  $128,623  93 

Barge  Canai 1,770         59,565,070  51 

Total,   canals    1,959  $59,693,694  44 

Highways. 31  725,109  36 

State  Reservations   18  37'.', 775  44 

Miscellaneous 432  1,888,837    L9 

Grand  total   2,440        $62,687,416  43 


The  classification  of  claims  in  subdivisions  above  set  out  is  in 
some  instances  not  withoul  criticism.  The  classification  of  the 
subdivisions  under  the  general  classification  of  miscellaneous 
claims  seems  to  me  could  more  comprehensively  be  covered  by 
four  subdivisions,  such  as  negligence,  contract,  damage  and  taxes. 
Under  such  classification  the  classification  of  taxes  would  cover 


5  Doc.  No.  16 

any  payment  required  by  the  State  for  local  improvements  to 
State  property,  erroneous  taxes,  etc.  The  same  is  applicable  to 
some  other  classifications.  However,  I  am  submitting  for  your 
consideration  the  classifications  in  the  manner  in  which  they  are 
found.  This  same  criticism  perhaps  should  be  made  of  the  classifi- 
cation throughout.  Nevertheless  the  charts  are  comprehensive  in 
their  essentials,  referring  to  the  nature  of  claims,  particularly  in 
connection  with  the  canals,  which  appears  to  be  the  principal 
business  of  the  Court  of  Claims. 

On  the  whole,  the  matter  of  the  resolution  is  more  particularly 
discussed  than  was  requested.  The  magnitude  of  the  work  in 
assembling  data  as  required  in  the  resolution  required  the  use  of 
arbitrary  charts  and  it  has  been  found  necessary  to  furnish  the 
copy  by  manuscript  rather  than  by  type.  The  only  information 
not  furnished  upon  the  charts  is  that  requested  under  subdivisions 
3  and  4  of  the  resolution. 

Subdivision   3  of  the   resolution   follows,  viz.: 

"  3.   The  number  of  claims  adjusted  without  recourse  to 

the  Court  <!f  Claims  or  Board  of  Claims  in  each  year  of  the 

last  five  years." 

Number  of  claims  adjusted  without  recourse  to  the  Board  of 

Claims  or  Court  of  Claims  for  the  past  five  calendar  years  and 

from  January  1  to  June  1,  1915: 

YEAR       '  Agreements  Amount  of  settlement 

1010 233 .  . $1,639,769  97 

These  agreements  cover  31S  separate  parcels  of 
land  on  36  different  Contracts. 

1011 333 1,741,055  03 

These  agreements  cover  392  separate  parcels  of 
land  on  51  different  Contracts. 

1912 326 1,480,466  51 

These  agreements  cover  386%  separate  parcels  of 
land  on  46  different  Contracts. 

1013 255 645,642   23 

These  agreements  cover  300  separate  parcels  of 
land  on  54  different  Contracts. 

1914 212 854,785  71 

These  agreements  cover  259  separate  parcels  of 
land  on  60  different  Contracts. 

Included  in  this  number  of  settlements  are  13 
agreements  covering  14  parcels  of  land  appro- 
priated for  Barge  canal  terminals  the  amount  of 
settlement  for  which  was  $265,302.06.  These  agree- 
ments cover  S  different  terminal   Contracts. 


Doc.  No.  16                               6 

YEAR                                                  Agreements 

1915,   Jan.     1-Jime    1 .  .    51 

These  agreements  cover  68  separate  parcels  of  land 

Amount  of  settlemen 

$3-8,831  21 

on  27  different  Contracts. 

Included  in  this  number  of  agreements  are  three 
agreements  covering  three  parcels  of  land  appropri- 
ated for  Barge  canal  terminals,  the  amount  of  settle- 
ment for  which  was  $333.18.  These  settlements  cover 
two  different  terminal  Contracts. 


Subdivision  4  of  the  resolution,  viz. : 

"  The  total  amount  paid  by  the  State  in  satisfaction  of 
claims  in  each  year  of  the  last  five  years,"  ending  December 
1,  1914: 

1910 $257,034  40 

1911 745,961  35 

1912 516,055  44 

1913 1,328,217  92 

1914 1,039,955  13 


$3,887,224  24 


The  claims  paid  in  the  course  of  these  years  have  been,  when 
particularly  discussed  as  to  the  character  of  the  fund  payment, 
from  the  following  funds :  General,  Old  Canal,  Barge  Canal,  and 
Terminal. 

Subdivision    of    Resolution    Affecting    the    Department    of    the 
A  Homey-General 
The  resolution  further  requested,  viz. : 

"  Further  resolved,  That  the  Superintendent  of  Public 
Works,  the  State  Engineer  and  Surveyor  and  the  Attorney- 
General  transmit  to  the  Convention,  at  their  earliest  con- 
venience, the  following  information  relating  to  matters  pend- 
ing and  disposed  of  during  each  of  the  ten  years  last  past, 
before  the  Courts  of  Claims  and  the  Boards  of  Claims,  so  far 
as  such  information  shall  be  of  record  in  their  respective 
offices,  viz. : 

"  1.  The  amounts  paid  in  each  year  to  officers,  employees, 
agents,  investigators  and  representatives  of  such  depart- 
ments, respectively,  for  services,  fees,  expenses  and  disburse- 
ments iu  relation  to  matters  before  said  courts  or  boards. 


7  Doc.  No.  16 

"2.  The  amounts  paid  or  incurred  for  services,  fees  and 
expenses  of  witnesses,  consulting  experts,  special  counsel  and 
otherwise  in  relation  to  matters  before  said  courts  or  boards." 

Item  No.  1  of  this  subdivision  is  fully  answered  by  the  infor- 
mation that  there  is  in  this  department  a  Court  of  Claims  bureau 
which  until  the  1st  of  January,  1915,  consisted  of  the  following 
officers  and  employees  at  the  salaries  hereinafter  set  out : 

Deputy  Attorney-General   $5,000 

Deputy  Attorney-General 3,500 

Attorney,  Board  of  Claims  bureau 3,000 

Stenographer  and  record  clerk 1,800 


Total,   salaries    $13,300 


The  character  of  the  work  in  this  bureau  of  the  office  and  the 
demands  upon  the  department  have  been  such  that  from  time  to 
time  other  deputies,  as  required  by  the  Attorney-General,  have 
assisted  with  the  work  in  the  Court  of  Claims.  The  second 
deputy  (salary,  $6,000)  in  the  administration  ended  January  1, 
1915,  devoted  practically  full  time  to  cases  involving  matters  of 
water  power,  contract  cases,  etc.  The  matter  of  the  expenses  of 
these  men  it  is  estimated  would  total  between  $2,000  and  $3,000 
per  annum.  The  expenses  of  experts,  witnesses,  etc.,  in  cases 
affecting  canals  have  been  taken  care  of  by  the  agent  in  the  office 
of  the  Superintendent  of  Public  Works,  and  this  character  of 
information  will  be  furnished  by  his  department.  The  matter 
of  other  experts  would  average  $1,000  per  annum. 

At  the  present  time  in  the  effort  which  this  department  is 
making  to  relieve  the  congested  condition  of  the  calendar  in  the 
Court  of  Claims,  there  are  six  Deputies  Attorney-General  regu- 
larly assigned  to  the  Court  of  Claims,  salaries  totaling  $28,000. 
The  expenses  in  this  department  occasioned  by  traveling,  experts 
other  than  in  canal  cases,  and  for  the  printing  of  papers  in  con- 
nection with  appeals,  will  require  between  $7,000  and  $12,000 
for  the  next  calendar  year.  In  addition  to  the  above  items,  there 
are  two  other  deputies  whose  time  for  the  greater  part  is  occupied 


Doc.  No.   16  8 

in  connection  with  cases  in  this  court,  salaries  totaling  $12,000, 
so  that  there  is  a  general  demand  upon  this  department  for  sal- 
aries, as  estimated  at  this  time,  of  $40,000. 

In  addition  to  the  figures  above  stated,  permit  me  to  state  that 
in  consideration  of  the  demands  above  referred  to,  I  have  found 
it  necessary  to  assign  some  cases,  such  as  highway  matters,  etc., 
to  other  deputies  in  the  department  in  order  that  they  may  be 
properly  prepared  and  ready  for  trial  at  the  earliest  possible 
moment. 

All   of  which    is   respectfully   submitted. 

E.  E.  WOODBURY, 

Attorney-General. 


9  Doc.  No.  16 

Canal  System  —  State  of  New  York  —  Claims  Pending  May  i,  19 15 


Old 

Ianal 

COUNTY 

Leakage  and 
overflow 

Damage 

Services,  claims 
for  overtime 

Total  old  canal 

No. 

Amount 

No. 

Amount 

No. 

Amount 

No. 

Amount 

1 

$850  00 

1 

$850  00 

13 

7,831  00 

13 

7,831  00 

13  Erie 

15  Fulton.. 

1 

500  25 

67 

$15,373  44 

68 

15,873  69 

2 

4,414  00 

2 

1 

45 

4,414  00 

1 

$500  00 

500  00 

1 

600  00 

44 

9,511  54 

10,111  54 

2,500  00 

1 
24 

28  Oneida 

24 

7 

23,898  75 
3,163  00 

23,898  75 

29  Onondaga 

1,376  00 

4,539  00 

32  Orleans 

2 
.    1 

5,200  00 
450  00 

2 

1 

.5,200  00 

33  Oswego 

450  00 

36  Rockland 

2 
5 

9,170  00 
35,384  41 

7 

1,808  80 

9 
5 

10,978  80 

35,384    11 

42  Steuben 

■43  Suffolk 

46  Ulster 

47  Warren 

48  Washington .... 

7 

5,786  24 

2 

306  50 

9 

0,092  74 

49  Wayne 

Totals 

66 

$97,247  65 

3 

$4,376  00 

120 

$27,000  2S 

189 

$128,623  93 

Doc.  No.  16 


10 


Canal  System  —  State  of  New  York 


Barqb 

COUNTY 

Permanent 
appropriations 

Water  rights 

Leakage  and 
overflow 

Contracts 

Due  to  the 
fault  or  negli- 
gence of  the 
State 

No, 

Amount 

No. 

Amount 

No, 

Amount 

No. 

Amount 

Xo. 

Amount 

1  Albany 

7 

$813,222  50 

IS 

$39,849  85 

6 

4,000  00 
200  00 

5  Cayuga 

11 

86,255  07 

13  Erie 

4 

1,910,397  24 

1 

$329  52 

15  Fulton . . . 

5 

5,660  00 

97 

9,448,455  14 

13  s 

205,719  50 

3 

$270,864  02 

1 

22,000  00 

1 
6 

1 

S320  00 
26,500  00 
3,255  00 

25 
33 
28 

12,880  01 
31,207  34 
23,269  83 

1 

HI 

1 

200  00 

24  Monroe 

25  Montgomery. 

26  New  York 

77 
55 

5 
13 
98 
13 

2 

2,460,947  69 
454,580  86 

178,370  15 

2,417,128  ?5 

961,104  54 

9,500  00 

8 
2 

1,260,801  32 
27,583  39 

48,039  11 
100  00 

27  Niagara 

28  Oneida 

29  Onondaga .  .  . 

4 

11U 
53 

2,445  00 
48,443  58 
49,491  12 

5 
24 
25 

9,868  29 

5 

13,383  60 
15,000  00 

1 

24,638  02 
57,387  60 

25,737  68 
69,775  47 

92 
74 

1 
3 

1,974,520  94 
9,217,491  34 
1,190,187  85 
5,297,367  46 

7 

7.' 

10,958  14 
190,843  12 

2 

247,565  36 
3,799  97 

3 

29 

2,942  68 

33  Oswego 

34  Queens 

15 

2,399,811  70 

196,841  89 

449,357  42 

38  Saratoga..  .. 

39  Schenectady 

40  Schuyler.  .  .  . 

44 

in 
i 

80 

4,754,090  65 

1,143,300  30 

83,201  10 

2,492,608  08 

2 
1 

117,230  00 
573,803  03 

27 
55 

50,138  94 
231,883  80 

2 

53,067  80 

6 
18 

61,799  95 
35,874  03 

1 

2,640  00 

43  Suffolk 

45  Tompkins.  .  . 

1! 

1,250  00 

1 
27 

-i 

1,750  00 
1,134,672  01 
3,571,521  65 

3 
52 
17 

920  00 
38,572  10 
7,167  08 

48  Washington.. 

49  Wayne 

3 
3 

5,032  08 
51,383  84 

11 

1,046,184  52 
129,093  35 

13 
4 

82,361  00 
7,044  72 

Totals 

865 

»51,0.sti,31-.1  7* 

38 

$3,205,719  25 

962 

$1,017,012  41 

37 

$3,570,342  77 

151 

$565,554  34 

11 


Doc.  No.  16 


Claims  Pending  May  i,  1915  —  Continued 


Canal 

DAMAGES 

To  boats 

Total  barge  canal 

Total  both  canals 

By  pollution 
of  stream 

Closing  of 
navigation 

No. 

Amount 

No. 

Amount 

No. 

Amount 

No. 

Amount 

No. 

Amount 

1 

$760  61 

23 

$853,841  96 

24 

$854,691  96 

1 

?, 

3 

6 

12 

64,000  00 
86,455  07 

6 
25 

64,000  00 
94,286  07 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

in 

ii 

12 

5 

1,910,726  76 

5 

1,910,726  76 

13 

14 

15 

5 

5,660  00 

5 

5,660  00 

16 

17 

239 

9,947,038  66 

307 

9,962,912  35 

18 

19 

?n 

21 

M, 

27 
147 

88 

5 
54 
239 
123 

2 

13,400  01 

3,834,720  91 

509,455  89 

1,484,389  96 

192,312  74 

2,529,422  43 

1,152,758  73 

9,500  00 

29 
148 
133 

5 
55 
263 
131 

2 

17,814  01 

3,835,220  91 

519,567  43 

1,484,389  96 

194,812  74 

2,553,321  18 

1,157,297  73 

9,500  00 

?3 

4 
1 

7,225  45 
666  81 

24 

715 

26 

2 
1 

1,629  30 
91  30 

27 

28 

29 

30 

31 

2 

4,288  25 

106 
193 

1 
5 

2,240,275  37 

12,069,890  32 
1,190,187  S5 
5,746,724  88 

108 
194 

1 
5 

2,245,475  37 
12,070,340  32 
1,190,187  85 
5,746,724  88 

32 

2 

$61,102  30 

33 

34 

36 

9i 

6 
83 

5,036,327  34 

1,984,861  16 

S6.904  33 

2,537,763  79 

91 

102 
11 

83 

5,036,327  34 

1,995,839  96 

122,288  74 

2,537,763  79 

38 

39 

1 

340  23 

2 

$42,515  71 

42 

2 

1,250  00 

2 

1,250  00 

110 
101 

2,308,321  71 
3,766,210  64 

119 

101 

2,314,414  45 
3,766,210  64 

1 

1,500  00 

2 

$42,515  71 

2 

$61,102  30 

13 

$16,510  95 

1770 

$59,565,070  51 

1959 

$59,693,694  44 

Doc.  No.  16  12 

State  of  New  York  —  Claims  Pending  May  i,  1915  —  Continued 


Highways 

COUNTY 

Contract 

Damage 

Highway 
damage 

Pro  rata  bond 

tax 
construction 
of  highways 

Total 

No. 

Amount 

Nc. 

Amount 

No 

Amount 

No 

1 
Amount    'No. 

Amount 

2 

$306,547  57 

2 

$306,547  57 

1 
3 

56,503  92 
8,026  80 

22,235  02 

2 
1 

4 

6  Chemung .  .  . 

1 

$3,000  00 

1 

28,508  44 

1 

1 
2 

5,853  74 
21,504  50 

1 
2 

13  Erie 

14  Franklin 

15  Fulton 

18  Herkimer.  .  . 

T 

47,187  99 
11,633  05 

2 
1 

1 

1,500,00 

1 

$9,500  00 

2 

26  New  York..  . 

1 

1 

1 

1,435  21 
301   16 

1 

1,962  26 

1 

$122  00 

3 

1 

26,020  72 

1 

32  Orleans 

1 

9,583  37 

1 

1 

13  Suffolk 

1 

132,437  00 

1 

44  Sullivan 

1 

7,500  00 

7,500  00 

1 

1,610  00 

1 

1  .610  00 

2 

20,961   61 

2 

20,961   61 

Totals 

22 

$698,740   10 

5 

$14,635  00 

2 

$11,462  26 

1 

$122  00 

30 

$724,959  36 
150  00 

:;i 

$725,109  36 

13  Doc.  3STo.  16 

State  of  New  York  —  Claims  Pending  May  i,  1915 — Continued 


State 

Reservations 

COUNTY 

Permanent 
appropriation 

Use  of  land 
and  water  by 
Forest,  Fish 
and  Game 
Commission 

Appropriation 
of  timber 

Damage 
caused  by- 
animals 

Total 

No 

Amount 

No 

Amount 

No 

Amount 

No 

Amount 

No. 

Amount 

i 

2 

$2,345  00 

2 

1 

11   50 

1 

11   50 

13  Erie. 

1 

$1,900  00 

1 

15  Fulton 

1 

1 

$1,125  00 
80,928  17 

1 
1 

1,123  00 

80,928  17 

1 

$400  00 

1 

25  Montgomery 

26  New  York. .  . 

28  Oneida 

1 

68  27 

1 

32  Orleans 

1 
1 

172  M 
75  00 

1 

3 

2S0.000  00 

3 

2S0.000  00 

43  Suffolk 

1 

254  00 

1 

45   Sullivan .... 

1 

1,176  00 

46  Ulster 

2 

10,976  00 

1 

344  00 

3 

49  Wayne 

Totals 

7 

$294,052  00 

1 

$400,00 

2 

$82,053  17 

8 

$3,270  27 

18 

S379.775  44 

Doc.  No.  16 


14 


State  of  York- 


Miscellaneous 

COUNTY 

Injury  and 
negligence 

Contract 

Damage 

Interest  on 

excise  money, 

City  of 

New  York 

Salaries 

due  state 

employees  for 

services,  etc. 

S'o. 

Amount 

^0. 

Amount 

So. 

Amount 

\'o 

Amount 

No. 

Amount 

1  Albany 

5 

$17,539  50 

6 

J333.502  43 

1 

$200  00 
1,700  00 

1 

1 

1 

1,770  50 
647  55 

3 

1 

10,178,57 
10,000  00 

1 

1 
2 

5,000  00 

380  50 

4,225  00 

1 

14,210  00 

1 

500  00 

3 

586  00 

2 

8 

25,i37  00 
64,978  64 

1 

16,323  03 

1 

4,645  00 

1 

200  00 

1 

73,017  06 

1 
1 

1,842  00 

2 
1 

16,626  20 
1,242  50 

2,724  94 

1 

1,185  64 

1 

150  00 

1 
2 

146,159  90 
1,400  00 

1 

7 

5,000  00 
14,270  16 

2 

1 

1 

151  55 
25  00 

900  00 

25  Montgomery 

1 

$11,460  00 

1 

99  50 

27  Niagara 

2 

5 

17 
2 

4 
2 
1 

23,855  00 
157,070  00 
21,425  00 

33,942  40 
3,415  00 
10,000  00 

29  Onondaga. . . 

2 

28,650  10 

2 

1 

82,295  98 
700  00 

31  Orange. . . . . 

1 

3,139  75 

1 

1,075  00 

33  Oswego 

1 

5,000  00 

i 

2 

38  Saratoga. . . 

39  Schenectady 

40  Schuyler 

1 
4 

1 

1 
1 

10,000  00 

9,615  05 

350  00 

5,000  00 
12,000  0C 

2,309  66 

1 

22,691  14 

1 

500  0C 

48  Washington 

49  Wayne .... 

50  Westchester 

■ 

1,000  OC 
2,000  0( 

1 

6,838  38 

Totals.  . 

7< 

!}4 '.!.-,,  24(1   C 

5    25 

$638,073  11 

1-1 

$90,771  0. 

t      1 

$11,460  01 

'. 

$19,094  82 

15 


Doc.  No.  16 


Claims  Pending  May  i,  1915— Continued 


Claims 

Loss  of 
property 

hired 
by  State 

Failure  to 

deliver  goods 

bought  at 

public  sale 

Recovery  of 

county  taxes 

on  railway 

bonds 

Recovery  of 
taxes 

Total 

No. 

Amount 

No. 

Amount 

No. 

Amount 

No. 

Amount 

No. 

Amount 

13 
1 
1 
4 
1 

$352,461  93 
1,700  00 
1,770  50 
10,826  12 
10,000  00 

1 

?, 

3 

4 

n 

6 

1 

$1,478  72 

1 
3 
1 
2 

3 

4 

8 

1,478  72 

19,710  00 

380  50 

4,225  00 

586  00 
46,105  03 
64,978  64 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 



1 

200  00 

15 

16 

2 
3 
2 

74,859  06 
19,351   14 
2,428  14 

17 

18 

20 

1 
1 
3 
9 
1 

6 

2 

5 

21 

3 

6 
3 

2 

150  00 

146,159  90 

6,400  00 

14,421  71 

25  00 

17,464  64 
3,305  00 
23,855  00 
286,016  08 
22,125  00 

38,173  71 
4,490  00 
17,021  31 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

1 

$82  50 

2 

$4,922  64 

26 

1 

1,091  56 

1 

7,021  31 

1 

5,000  00 

35 

1 

9,173  63 

4 
1 
4 
1 

1 
1 
1 

28,439  20 

10,000  00 

9,615  05 

350  00 

5,000  00 
12,000  0(J 
2,309  6fc 



42 

1 
1 
4 

1 

22,691   14 

500  0C 

9,681  OC 

2,000  0C 

1 

$200  0C 

1 

1,642  62 

1 
Refu 

$200  0( 

1 

for  s 

$82  5C 

J 

$20,407  & 

2 

$4,922  64 

134 

297 

1 

$1,208,254  It 

605,097  6( 

3,485  3. 

Refund  of  money,  Kin 

43i 

$1,888,837  1< 

Doc.  No.  16 


L6 


State  of  New  York— Total 


Classification 

County 

Old  canal 

Barge  canal 

Total  canals 

No 

Amount 

No 

Amount 

No.i        Amount 

1 

1 

S850  0C 

22 

$853,841  9e 

2  Bronx 

1 

3  Broome 

.::::::: 

f 

64,000  00 
86,455  07 

e 

25 

13 

7,831  0C 

12 

i 

8  Clinton 

10  Cortland 

12  Dutchess 

13  Erie 

5 

1,910,726  76 

5 

15  Fulton 

5 

5,660  00 

5 

18  Herkimer.  .  . 

68 

15,873  69 

239 

9,947,038  66 

307 

9,962,912  35 

20  Kings 

21   Lewis 

2 

1 

4,414  00 
500  00 

27 
147 
88 

5 
54 
239 
123 

2 

13,400  01 
3,834,720  91 

1,484,389  96 

192,312  74 

2,529,422  43 

1,152,758  73 

9,500  00 

29 

MS 

26  New  York 

1 

24 
8 

2,500  00 
23,898  75 
4,539  00 

55 

2(13 

131 

2 

28  Oneida 

2,553,321   18 

30  Ontario 

9,500  00 

2 
1 

5,200  00 
450  00 

106 
193 

1 
6 

2,240,275  37 
12,069,890  32 
1,190,187  85 
5,746,724  88 

108 

194 

1 

5 

12,070,340  32 

34  Queens 

1,190,187  85 

5,746,724  88 

91 

93 

83 

5,036,327  34 
1,984,861   16 

2,537,763  79 

91 
102 

83 

5,036,327  34 

9 

1,995,839  96 

35,384  41 

122,288  74 

2,537,763  79 

43  Suffolk 

:!::::::::::::;;: 

1,250  00 

46  Ulster 

4 
110 
101 

2,670  00 
2.30S, 321   71 
:i,7(.tl,210  64 

4 
119 

lid 

2,670  00 

9 

6,092  74 

2,31  I.  Ill    15 

3,766,210  64 

Totals 

189 

$128,623  93 

1770 

$59,565,070  51 

9.V.) 

859,693,694  44 

IT 


Doc.  No.   16 


Claims  Pending  May  i,  1915 — Concluded 


of  Claims 

Highways 

State  reservations 

Miscellaneous 

Grand  total 

No. 

Amount 

No. 

Amount 

No. 

Amount 

No. 

Amount 

2 

$306,547  57 

13 

1 

4 

1 

$352,461  93;     39 
1,700  00,        1 
1,770  50,        1 

$1,513,701  46 

1,700  00 

1,770  50 

131,330  04 

112,312  87 

25,385  02 
1,478  72 
19,710  00 
31,233  94 
4,225  00 

597  50 
51,958  77 

1.997.209  90 
1,900  00 

200  00 

5,660  00 
75,984  06 
10,110,379  65 
14,061   19 
3,485  35 

150  00 

146,159  90 

24,214  01 

3,861,042  62 

519,592  43 

2,106,952  26 

199,142  74 

2,580,695  65 

1,425,614  97 

31,625  00 

64,262  70 
2,249,965  37 
12,087,361  63 
1,190,187  87 
5,761,480  75 

75  00 

28,439  20 

5,326,327  34 

2,005,455  01 

122,638  74 

2,542,763  79 

12,000  00 

135,000  66 

8,676  00 

1,250  00 

34,011    14 

3,170  00 

2,325,705  45 

3.768.210  64 
20,961   61 

1 

7, 

s 

2 

56,503  92 
8,026  80 

25,385  02 

1 

10,000  00 

27 
5 

3 

4 
2 

4 
5 
15 
1 
1 

5 
3 
313 
3 
1 

1 

32 

160 
134 

308 
58 
271 
153 
5 

8 
111 

196 

1 
8 

4 
95 
106 
12 

84 
1 
3 
2 
2 

4 
5 

124 

102 

2 

5 

{ 

2 

3 

4 
8 

1,478  72 

19,710  00 

380  50 

4,225  00 

586  00 
46,105  03 
64,978  64 

7 

8 

1 

28,508  44 

2 

$2,345  00 

9 

in 

1 

11   50 

1 1 

1 

5,853  74 
21,504  50 

V 

2 

n 

1 

1,900  00 

14 

1 

200  00 

IS 

16 

1 

1 , 125  00 
80,928  17 

2 
3 
2 

1 
3 
9 
1 

303 
2 
5 
21 
3 

6 
3 

2 

74,859  06 
19,351   14 
2,428  14 
3,485  35 

150  00 

146,159  90 

6,400  00 

14,421  71 

25  00 

622,562  30 
3,305  00 

23,855  00 
268,016  OS 

22,125  00 

3S.173  71 
4,490  00 
17,021  31 

17 

2 
1 

47,187  99 
11,633  05 

18 
19 

an 

31 

?? 

?S 

2 

11,000  00 

1 

400  00 

24 
?5 

9fi 

1 

1,025  00 

3,519  47 

301   16 

07 

3 

?s 

1 

<!,, 

fUl 

1 

26,020  72 

1 

68  27 

31 

3? 

R3 

34 

1 

9,583  37 

1 
1 

172  50 
75  00 

1 

5,000  00 

35 
ftfi 

4 
4 

1 
1 
1 

28,439  20 

10,000  00 

9,615  05 

350  00 

5,000  00 
12,000  00 
2,309  66 

■>,7 

3 

280,000  00 

••S't 

40 

41 

1 
1 

132,437  00 
7,500  00 

1 

254  00 
1,176  00 

43 

44 

3 

11,320  00 

1 
1 
4 
1 

22,691   14 

500  00 

9,681  00 

2,000  00 

-17 

1 

1,610  00 

48 

40 

2 

20,96i  6i 

50 

31 

$725,109  36 

18 

$379,775  44 

432 

$1,888,837   19 

2440 

$62,687,416  43 

STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.   17 


MEMORIAL  OF  THE  NEW  YORK   STATE   FEDERATION 
OF  LABOR 


Utica,  X.  Y.,  June  8,  1915 

To    the    President    and    Delegates    to    the    State    Constitutional 
( 'onvention: 

Gentlemen. —  The  undersigned,  on  behalf  of  the  Xew  York 
State  Federation  of  Labor,  representing  700,000  organized  work- 
ers, and  speaking  for  the  unorganized,  beg  leave  to  respectfully 
bring  to  the  attention  of  your  honorable  body  Labor's  desires  in 
the  building  of  our  new  State  Constitution. 

Attached  to  and  made  a  part  of  this  memorial  is  a  copy  of  twen- 
ty-four propositions  adopted  by  representatives  of  the  Organized 
Labor  movement  of  the  State  at  a  conference  held  in  the  City  of 
Albany,  May  24-26,  1015.  It  constitutes  a  Bill  of  Rights.  We 
earnestly  petition  that  it  be  made  a  part  of  the  new  State  Con- 
stitution. It  represents  advanced  thought.  It  represents  the 
hopes  and  aspirations  of  wage-earners  for  better  living  and  work- 
ing conditions  in  the  future.  We  believe  it  will  elevate  all  the 
people  of  the  State  to  a  higher  plane  and  make  equality  before 
the  law  real,  tangible  and  lasting.  It  will  tend  to  beget  con- 
fidence in  government  and  allav  industrial  strife.     The  twenty- 


Doc.  Xo.  17  2 

four  propositions  are  big  and  broad  enough  for  all  the  people  to 
stand  on. 

We  present  to  you  this  Bill  of  Rights  confident  it  will  receive 
your  earnest,  sympathetic  consideration.  That  it  may  become  a 
part  of  your  finished  work  and  be  incorporated  in  the  funda- 
mental law,  we  shall  ever  pray. 

Respectfully  submitted, 

HOMER  D.  CALL, 
Prest.  N.  Y.  S.  F.  of  L. 
Edward  A.  Bates, 

Secretary-Treasurer. 

For  the  New  York  Stale  Federation  of  Labor. 


AMENDMENTS  TO  STATE  CONSTITUTION  PRESENTED  TO  CON- 
STITUTIONAL CONVENTION  BY  THE  NEW  YORK  STATE 
FEDERATION  OF  LABOR 

Albany,  May  28,  1915. 

1.  Resolved,  That  the  Constitution  contain  a  provision  as  fol- 
lows: "  That  the  labor  of  a  human  being  is  not  a  commodity  or 
article  of  commerce  and  the  Legislature  shall  not  enact  a  law  and 
the  courts  shall  not  construe  a  law  contrary  to  this  declaration." 

2.  Resolved,  That  any  act  which  any  person  may  legally  and 
lawfully  do  shall  be  held  to  be  legal  and  lawful  when  done  by 
two  or  more  in  consort. 

3.  Proposing  an  amendment  to  article  1  (section  10  and  new 
section),  providing  that  nothing  contained  in  the  Constitution 
shall  be  construed  to  limit  the  power  of  the  Legislature  to  enact 
laws  for  the  protection  of  the  lives,  health,  safety,  comfort  or 
general  welfare  of  employees. 

4.  For  power  to  enable  the  State  to  insure  workers  against  acci- 
dent, sickness,  invalidity,  old  ago  and  unemployment. 

5.  To  provide  a  State  fund,  to  insure  employers  against  a  risk 
of  workmen's  compensation,  to  the  exclusion  of  every  other  form 
of  compensation  insurance. 

G.  Thai  there  shall  be  a  Department  of  Labor  and  a  Compensa- 
tion Commission  (function  separated)  provided  for  in  the  Con- 
stitution. 

7.   Empowering  the  State  and  its  several  political  divisions  to 


3  Doc.  Xo.  17 

undertake  such  public  works  and  engage  in  such  industries,  as 
they  deem  necessary  to  the  public  welfare  for  the  purpose  of  re- 
lieving distress  from  unemployment  or  other  extraordinary  emer- 
gencies. 

8.  Abolish  the  power  of  the  courts  to  nullify  laws  regularly 
passed  by  the  Legislature  or  the  voters  of  the  State  by  means  of 
referendum  on  the  ground  of  alleged  unconstitutionality. 

9.  Insure  the  right  to  trial  by  jury  in  all  criminal  or  quasi- 
criminal  prosecutions  where  the  offense  charged  is  punishable  by 
imprisonment,  including  all  cases  of  contempt  of  court. 

10.  To  provide  that  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  shall  never  be 
suspended  and  that  military  tribunals  shall  not  exercise  civil  or 
criminal  jurisdiction  over  citizens  while  the  regularly  constituted 
State  courts  are  open  to  administer  justice. 

•  11.   For  the  extension  of  popular  rule  and  control  of  officials  by 
the  initiative,  referendum  and  recall. 

12.  Favor  election  of  all  judges.  Election  to  take  place  at  time 
no  other  officer  is  elected.  Ballots  to  contain  no  party  emblem. 
Candidates  to  be  grouped  under  title  of  office. 

13.  Resolved,  That  this  special  convention  of  the  New  York 
State  Federation  of  Labor  declares  itself  in  the  interest  of  the 
masses  of  the  citizenship  of  the  State  of  Xew  York  against  the 
abandonment  of  the  annual  sessions  of  the  Xew  York  State  Legis- 
lature. 

11.  Resolved,  That  the  terms  of  the  elective  officers  of  the  State 
of  Xew  York  shall  not  be  extended. 

15.  That  the  terms  of  the  State  Senators  shall  be  for  a  period  of 
one   year. 

10.  Resolved,  That  the  delegates  to  constitutional  conventions 
be  elected  at  a  time  when  no  other  State  officials  are  to  he  chosen 
and  that  no  party  emblems  be  used  at  such  elections. 

17.  Eesolved,  With  a  view  of  having  the  members  of  the  Legis- 
lature in  a  more  independent  position  financially,  this  conference 
recommend  to  the  Constitutional  Convention  the  wisdom  of  rais- 
ing the  salaries  of  the  members  of  the  Legislature  to  an  adequate 
amount. 

18.  To  amend  procedure  necessary  to  pass  a  bill  (now  found 
in  section  15,  article  3),  so  as  to  take  from  the  Governor  the 
nullifying  of  that  section  by  the  use  of  emergency  messages. 


Doc.  No.  17  -i 

19.  Against  the  State  constabulary  and  the  employment  of  pri- 
vate armed  force  in  labor  disputes.  That  the  Governor  of  the 
State  be  the  Commander-in-Chief  of  the  army  and  naval  forces 
thereof,  and  that  as  such  Commander,  he  alone  be  em] towered  to 
call  out  any  portion  or  the  whole  of  said  forces  or  either  of  them 
in  time  of  need. 

20.  Resolved,  That  this  conference  of  the  Executive  Council 
and  representatives  of  labor  of  the  State  of  Xew  York  go  on 
record  in  favor  of  the  constitutional  amendment  as  adopted  by 
the  Legislature,  to  be  voted  upon  at  the  coming  election  for 
woman  suffrage,  and  that  all  are  urgently  requested  to  support 
the  ratification  thereof. 

21.  Resolved,  That  inasmuch  as  the  so-called  "  Short  Ballot  "  is 
a  proposition  to  vest  greater  powers  in  the  hands  of  the  chief  ex- 
ecutive of  the  nation,  states  and  municipalities,  it  is  in  violation 
of  the  fundamental  principles  of  justice,  democracy  and  freedom. 
The  proposition  should  therefore  not  be  endorsed  but  condemned 
and  opposed,   and  it  is  hereby  condemned. 

22.  Free  Speech  and  Free  Press. —  Every  person  may  freely 
speak,  write  or  publish  his  sentiments  on  all  subjects,  being  re- 
sponsible for  the  abuse  of  that  right,  and  no  law  shall  be  passed 
by  the  Legislature  to  restrain  or  abridge  the  liberty  of  speech  or  of 
the  press.  jSTor  shall  any  officer  or  court  of  the  State,  or  officer 
or  court  of  any  political  division  of  the  State,  abridge,  enjoin  or 
restrain  the  liberty  of  speech  or  of  the  press.  The  question  as  to 
whether  the  rights  of  freedom  of  speech,  or  of  the  press  have  been 
abused,  shall  Ik1  determined  by  a  jury.  In  all  criminal  prose- 
cutions for  libel,  no  person  shall  be  found  guilty  and  be  punished 
where  the  matter  alleged  to  be  libelous  be  true  unless  the  alleged 
matter  was  written  and  published  with  criminal  motives  and  for 
wrongful  ends. 

23.  Eight  Hours. —  In  all  cases  of  employment  by  and  on  be- 
half of  the  Stale,  or  any  political  division  thereof,  or  in  any  con- 
tract for  labor  or  for  supplies,  by  or  on  behalf  of  the  State,  or 
any  political  division  thereof,  not  more  than  eight  hours  in  any 
twenty-four  consecutive  hours  shall  constitute  a  day's  work. 

24.  Capital  Punishment. —  Capital  punishment,  that  is,  death 
penalty  for  crime,  is  hereby  prohibited. 


STATE  OF  NEW    YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.   18 


ANSWER  OF  STATE  COMPTROLLER  EUGENE  M.  TRAVIS 
TO  A  RESOLUTION  OF  THE  CONVENTION,  RELA- 
TIVE TO  SINKING  FUNDS  OF  THE  STATE  OF  NEW 
YORK,  DATED  MAY  5,  1915 


State  of  New  York  —  Comptroller's  Office 

Albany,  June  16,  1915 

The  Constitutional  Convention  of  the  State  of  New  York,  Albany, 

New  York: 

Gentlemen  :  In  response  to  a  resolution  of  your  honorable 
body  dated  May  5,  1915  and  received  June  11th,  a  copy  of  which 
follows : 

May  5,  1915 
"  By  Mr.  Wagner : 

Resolved,  That  the  State  Comptroller  be  requested  to  trans- 
mit to  this  Convention  a  statement  showing  the  amount  and 
term  of  all  bonds  issued  under  the  provisions  of  Article  7 
of  the  Constitution  and  now  outstanding ;  also  the  amount  in 
each  sinking  fund  for  the  redemption  of  such  bonds  together 
with  the  amount  which  should  be  in  each  sinking  fund  if 


Doc.  No.  18  2 

such  fund  was  maintained  on  a  three  per  cent,  amortization 
basis." 
I  beg  to  submit  for  your  consideration  the  following  state- 
ments : 

EXHIBIT  "A" 
Condensed  Balance  Sheet  of  the  Sinking  Funds  of  the  State  as 
of  April  30,  1915. 

EXHIBIT  "  B  " 

Statement  of  the  Bonded  State  Debt,  Sinking  Funds,  Reserves 
or  Calculated  Balances  and  Surplus  or  Excess  of  Sinking  Fund 
Resources  over  Reserves  or  calculated  balances  as  of  April  30, 
1915. 

Bonded  Debt 
The  total  bonded  State  Debt  outstanding  as  of  April  30,  1915, 
as  shown  by  details  in  Exhibit  "  B,"  was  $186,165,660.00,  classi- 
fied as  follows : 

Canal  Debt $118,000,660.00 

Highway  Debt 65,000,000.00 

Palisades  Interstate  Park  Debt 2,500,000.00 

Saratoga  Springs  State  Reservation  Debt.  .  .  .  665,000.00 

Total $186,165,660.00 


On  this  amount  the  Saratoga  Springs  State  Reservation  bonds 
of  $665,000.00  are  redeemable  from  General  Fund  revenues.  In 
addition  to  this  amount  there  has  been  issued  since  April  30,  1915, 
bonds  amounting  to  $235,000.00,  making  the  total  Saratoga 
Springs  Reservation  debt  as  of  June  1,  1915,  $900,000.00  for 
which  no  sinking  funds  are  maintained,  the  bonds  being  paid  by 
appropriations  from  General  Fund  revenues. 

Sinking  Fund  Resources 
The  total   of  the  Sinking  Fund   Resources  available  for  the 
interest  and  principal  of  the  debt  ($185,500,660.00)   for  which 
the  funds  were  established,  as  shown  by  the  balance  sheet,  Ex- 


3  Doc.  No.   18 

hibit  "A,"  as  of  April  30,  1915,  was  $40,568,351.32,  classified 
as  follows: 

Canal  Debt  Sinking  Funds $28,881,977.99 

Highway  Debt  Sinking  Funds 11,443,320.34 

Palisades  Interstate  Park  Debt  Sinking  Fund  243,052.99 

Total $40,568,351.32 


SUEPLUS 

The  Surplus  or  Excess  of  available  resources  over  the  reserves 
calculated  in  accordance  with  the  method  stated  in  the  Balance 
Sheet,  Exhibit  "A,"  as  of  April  30,  1915,  was  $28,904,706.05, 
classified  as  follows : 

Canal  Debt  Sinking  Funds $20,671,850.68 

Highway  Debt  Sinking  Funds 8,136,684.81 

Palisades  Interstate  Park  Debt  Sinking  Funds  96,170.56 


Total $28,904,706.05 


Bonds  Authorized  Not  Issued 
The  bonds  authorized,  but  not  yet  issued,  as  of  June  1,  1915, 
amounted  to  $44,899,000.00,  classified  as  follows : 

For  Barge  Canal  Terminals $9,800,000.00 

For  Highways 35,000,000.00 

For  Saratoga  Springs  State  Reservation 99,000.00 

Total $44,899,000.00 


In  addition  to  the  above  bonds  authorized  but  not  issued  there 
will  be  submitted  to  the  people  of  the  State  at  the  next  election 
for  their  consideration  a  proposition  to  issue  not  exceeding  $27,- 
000,000.00  of  bonds  for  the  purpose  of  continuing  the  improve- 
ment of  the  Erie,  Champlain  and  Oswego  Canals. 

Attached  hereto  find  statements  showing  in  detail  the  informa- 
tion requested. 

Respectfully  submitted, 

EUGENE  M.  TRAVIS, 

Comptroller. 


Doc.  No.   18  4 

State  of  New  York  —  Comptroller's  Office 

EXHIBIT  "A" 

condensed  balaxce   sheet  of   the   slnking  fuxds  of  the 

State  of  New  York  as  of  April  30,  1915 

(Details  shown  in  Exhibit  "  B  "  following) 

Resources 
Canal  Debt  Sinking  Funds 

Investments $20,639,878  29 

Cash 8,242,099  70 

$28,881,977  99 
Highway  Debt  Sinking  Funds 

Investments $7,549,490  00 

Contributions     of      1914     due 

from  General  Fund 3,367,281  50 

Cash 526,548  84 

11,443,320  34 

Palisades  Interstate  Park  Debt  Sinking  Fund 

Investments $97,300  00 

Contributions     of     1914     due 

from  General  Fund 142,328  48 

Cash 3,424  51 

243,052  99 

Total  Resources $40,568,351  32 


Liabilities  and  Strplus 
Reserve  for  Interest  Payable 

Canal  Debt $3,328,750  00 

Highway  Debt 1,360,000  00 

Palisades  Interstate  Park  Debt  50,000  00 

$4,738,750  00 


Doc.  No.   18 


Reserve  for  Principal 
Calculated  balances  April  30, 
1915,  which,  with  a  fixed  an- 
nual contribution  payable  at 
the  end  of  each  year  and  pro- 
portion with  interest  at  3  per 
cent,  compounded  annually 
during  the  term  of  each  bond 
issue,  would  be  sufficient  to 
retire  the  principal  of  the 
bonds  outstanding  at  their 
maturity  for: 

Canal  Debt $1,881,377  31 

Highway  Debt 1,916,635  53 

Palisades  Interstate  Park  Debt  96,882  43 


$6,924,895  27 

Total  Reserve $11,663,645  27 

Surplus 

(Excess  resources  over  reserves  as  above) 

Canal  Debt  Sinking  Funds $20,671,850  68 

Highway  Debt  Sinking  Funds.        8,136,684  81 
Palisades  Interstate  Park  Debt 

Sinking  Funds 96,170  56 


28,904,706  05 
Total  Liabilities  and  Surplus $40,568,351   32 


Doc.  No.   18 


6 


EXHIBIT 

Statement   of  Bonded  State  Debt,  Sinking  Funds,  Reserves  or 
Resources  over  Reserves  or  Calculat 


CHARACTER  OF  DEBT 


Term 
of 


Canal  Debt 

Sinking  Fund  No.  2 

3%  bonds  Erie,  Champlain  and 
Oswego  canals,  chapter  147,  Laws 
1903 


Sinking  Fund  No.  3 

3%  bonds  Erie,  Champlain  and 
Oswego  canals,  chapter  147,  Laws 
1903,  chapter  302,  Laws  1006, 
chapter  241,  Laws  1909 


Sinking  Fund  No.  4 

4%  bonds  Erie,  Champlain  and 
Oswego  canals,  chapter  147,  Laws 
1903,  chapter  66,  Laws  1910 


Sinking  Fund  No.  5 

4%  bonds,  Cayuga  and  Seneca 
canals,  chapter  391,  Laws  1909, 
chapter  139,  Laws  1910 


Sinking  Fund  No.  6 

4%  bonds,  Barge  canal  terminals.  . 

Sinking  Fund  No.  7 

4h%  bonds  Erie,  Champlain  and 
Oswego  canals,  chapter  147,  Laws 
1903,  chapter  66,  Laws  1910, 
chapter  7S7,  Laws  1913 

Sinking  Fund  No.  8 

•1;',',  bonds  Cayuga  and  Seneca 
canals,  chapter  391,  Laws  1909, 
chapter  139,  laws  1910,  chapter 
787,  Laws  19L5,  chapter  2,  Laws 
1915 


Sinking  Fund  No.  9 

4J%  bonds  Barge  canal  terminals, 
chapter  746,  Laws  1911,  chapter 
787,  Laws  1913,  chapter  2,  Laws 

I'll.".     


Sinking  Fund  No.  10 

<!',  bonds  Eric,  Champlain  and 
Oswego  canals,  chapter  147,  Laws 
1903,  chapter  66,  Laws  1910, 
chapter  787,  Laws  1913,  chapter 
2,  Laws  1915 


Jan.      1,  1905 


Jan. 
Jan. 
Jan. 
Jan. 


July 
Jan. 

July 


July 
Jan 


1,  1910 
1,  1911 
1,  1911 
1,  1912 


Jan.   1,1914 


Jan  1,  1956 

Jan  1,  1957 

Jan.  1,  1958 

Jan.  1,  1959 


1, 


July 

Jan  1,  1961 

July  1,  1961 

Jan.  1,  1962 


July     1,  1960 
Jan.      1,  1962 


Jan.      1,  1965 


Jan.      1,  L96i 


.52,000,000  00 


SI, 000. 000  00 
5,000,000  00 
5,000,000  00 

10. 0(H), 000  00 


621,000.0(1(1  mi 


$10,000,000  00 

10,000,000  oo 

10,000,000  00 
10.000,000  00 


840.  000.  000  00 


:?1 ,000.000  00 
2,000.000  00 


$3,000,000  00 


$.3, 000. 000  00 


,000,000  00 


4,000,000  00 


,->,OO0,00ip  O  ! 


50    Jan    1,  1965    8,000,000  00 


Doc.  No.   18 


"  B  " 

Calculated  Balances  and  Sulplus 
ed  Balances  as  of  April  30,  1915 


or  Excess  of  Sinking  Fund 


Cash  and 

investments 

in  funds 

April  30,  1915 


,175  04 


16,641,370   28 


349,925  95 
461,720  45 


262,612  65 


316, 0S1   12 
Deficit. 


Add 

Contributions 

due  from 
General  Fund 
from  appro- 
priations of 
1914 


Reserve  for 

intciest 

payable  from 

funds 


$30,000  00 
60,000  00 


$45,000  00 
225,000  00 
225,000  00 
450,000  00 


$945,000  00 


$200,000  00 
200,000  00 
200,000  00 
200,000  00 


$800,000  00 


Balance  after 
adjustments 

available 

for  principal 

of  debt 


$1,901,175  04 


3,725,280  62 


289,925  95 
361,720  45 


3,107,053  91 


Reserve  or 
calculated 
balani  es 

available 

for  principal 

as  of  April 

30,  1915 


$1,017,479  3' 


$93,921  37 
412,892  58 
330,836  19 

608,743  03 


$1,446,393   17 


$454,051  07 
404,160  06 
354,753  45 
306,315  60 


•SI  .519,280    IS 


$106,668  23 


$363,122  67 


23,641  33 


Excess  or 
surplus  of 
adjusted 
balances  over 
reserves  or 
calculated 
balances 
April  30,  1915 


$883,695  67 


,206,006  44 


183,257  72 
*1,402  22 


122,439  7  9 


Doc.  Xo.   18 


EXHIBIT  "  B  " 

Statement   of  Bonded  State  Debt,  Sinking  Funds,  Reserves  or 
Resources  over  Reserves  or  Calculat 


CHARACTER  OF  DEBT 

Date  of  issue 

Term 

of 
years 

Matu 

rity 

Outstanding 
bonds 

Non-Interest  Bearing  Debt 

Erie,    Champlain    and    Oswego   6% 

50 

50 

50 
50 
50 
50 

50 
50 

50 

July      1 
July      1 

1837 
1873 

Total 

Dec. 

Mar. 
Sept. 
Mar. 
Mar. 
Mar. 

Sept. 
Sept.. 

Mar. 

1,  1906 

1,  1903 

1,  190S 
1,  1910 
1,  1911 
1,  1912 

1,  1913 
1,  1913 

1,  1915 

Dec.      1 

Mar      ! 
Sept.    1 
Mar.     1 
-Mar.     1 
Mar.     1 

Sept.    1 

Sept.    1 

Mar.     1 

195;; 

1958 

- 

1960 

1961 

1962 

1963 
1963 

1965 

Highway  Debt 

Sinking  Fund  No.  1 

3%  bonds,  chapter  469,  Laws  1906. 

Sinking  Fund  No.  2 

4%  bonds,  chapter  469,  Laws  1906, 

- : ,000,000  00 

' . 000  90 
8,000,000  00 

Sinking  Fund  No.  3 

M%  bonds,  chapter  469,  Laws  1906, 
chapter  718,  Laws  1907,  chaptei 
787,  Laws  1913 

Sinking  Fund  No.  4 

4i%"bonds,  chapter  293,  Laws  1912, 
chapter  787,  Laws  1913 

$33,000,000  00 
16,000,000  00 

Sinking  Fund  No.  5 

4i%  bonds,  chapter  298,  Laws  1912, 
chapter  787,  Laws  1913,  chapter  2, 
Laws  1915 

Total 

$65,000,000  00 

Mar. 
Mar. 

1,  1911 
1,  1912 

50 
10 

Mar.     1 
*$9 

1901 
j.000 

Palisades  Interstate  Park  Debt  Sinking 
Fund 
4%  bonds,  chapter  363,  Laws  1910. 

Saratoga  Springs  State  Reservation 
4%  bonds,  chapter  569,  Laws  1909, 

$2,500,000  00 

$186,165,660  oo 

Annually. 


9 


Doc.  No.  li 


(Continued) 

Calculated  Balances  and  Sulplus  or  Excess  of  Sinking  Fund 
ed  Balances  as  of  April  30,  1915 


Sinking 

Funds 

Reserve  or 
calculated 
balances 
available 
for  principal 
as  of  April 
30,  1915 

Cash  and 

investments 

in  funds 

Apiil  30,  1915 

Add 

Contributions 

due  from 
General  Fund 
from  appro- 
priations of 
1914 

Deduct 

Reserve  for 

interest 

payable  from 

funds 

Balance  after 
adjustments 

available 

for  principal 

of  debt 

Excess  or 
surplus  of 
adjusted 
balances  over 
reserves  or 
calculated 
balances 
April  30,  1915 

$160  00 

$160  00 
500  00 

$160  00 
500  00 

500  00 

$28,881,977  99 
709,702  64 

$62,624  53 

$3,328,750  00 
15,000  00 

$25,553,227  99 
757,327   17 

$4,881,377  31 
83.514  39 

$20,671,850  68 
673,812  78 

$100,000  00 
100,000  00 
100,000  00 
200,000  00 
160,000  00 

$348,743  96 
322,014  64 
243,905  32 
387,529   73 
232,135  72 

1,980,000  00 

1,040,000  00 
284,656  97 

6,655,501   51 

1,935,451  00 
588,380  54 

146,660  12 

5,335,501   51 

$660,000  00 

$1,534,329  37 

5,121,172   14 

1,255,451  00 
416,223  57 

359,160  12 

$360,000  00 
112,500  00 

212,500  00 

$239,250  24 
74,765  70 

14,775  83 

1,696,200  76 
513,614  84 

131,884  29 

$8,076,038  84 

$3,367,281  50 

$1,360,000  00 

$10,883,320  34 

$1,946,635  53 

$8,136,684  81 

$100,724  51 

$142,328  48 

$50,000  00 

$193,052  99 

$96,882  43 

$96,170  56 

$37,058,741  34 

$3,509,609  98 

$4,738,750  00 

$35,829,601  32 

$6,924,895  27 

$28,904,706  05 

STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN   CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  19 


OPINION  OF  THE   COURT  OF  APPEALS  — WORKMEN'S 
COMPENSATION  LAW 

State   of  New   York,    Court   of   Appeals 

In  the  Matter  of  the  Claim  of  Marie  Jensen, 
Claimant-Respondent, 
for    Compensation    under    the    Workmen's 
Compensation  Law 

against 
Southern  Pacific  Company,  Employer  and 
Self-Insurer, 

Appellant.    J 

(Decided  July  13,  1915) 

Appeal  from  an  order  of  the  Appellate  Division  affirming  an 
award  of  the  Workmen's  Compensation  Commission. 

Norman  B.  Beecher,  for  Appellant. 

Egburt  E.  Woodbury,  Attorney-General  (E.  C.  Aiken  of  Coun- 
sel), for  Respondent. 

Visscher,  Whalen  c(-  Austin  filed  brief  for  New  York  Central 
Railroad  Company,  as  amici  curiae. 


Doc.  No.   19  2 

Miller,  J. —  The  claimant's  husband  was  killed  on  August 
15,  1914,  while  employed  in  unloading  the  steamship  El  Oriente 
which  was  berthed  alongside  a  pier  in  the  Hudson  river.  When 
the  accident  occurred  he  was  moving  an  electric  truck  upon  a 
gangway  connecting  the  vessel  w*th  the  pier.  The  appellant,  a 
corporation  of  the  state  of  Kentucky,  is  a  common  carrier  by  rail- 
road. It  also  owned  and  operated  said  steamship,  which  plied 
between  New  York  and  Galveston,  Texas,  It  does  not  appear  that 
the  steamship  was  in  any  way  operated  in  connection  with  a  line 
of  railroad  and  in  its  report  of  the  accident  the  appellant  stated 
its  business  to  be  "  transportation  by  steamships  engaged  solely  in 
interstate  commerce."  We  are  required  on  this  appeal,  first,  to 
construe  the  Workmen's  Compensation  Law  (chap.  07  of  the  Con- 
solidated Laws)  in  so  far  as  it  relates  to  this  case  and,  second, 
to  determine  its  constitutional  validity.  The  scheme  of  the  statute 
is  essentially  and  fundamentally  one  by  the  creation  of  a  state 
fund  to  insure  the  payment  of  a  prescribed  compensation  based 
on  earnings  for  disability  or  death  from  accidental  injuries  sus- 
tained by  employees  engaged  in  certain  enumerated  hazardous 
employments.  The  State  fund  is  created  from  premiums  paid  by 
employers  based  on  the  pay-roll,  the  number  of  employees  and  the 
hazards  of  the  employment.  The  employer  has  the  option  of  in- 
suring with  any  stock  corporation  or  mutual  association  author- 
ized to  transact  such  business,  or  of  furnishing  satisfactory  proof 
to  the  Commission  of  his  own  financial  ability  to  pay.  If  he  does 
neither  he  is  liable  to  a  penalty  equal  to  the  pro  rata  premium 
payable  to  the  State  fund  during  the  period  of  his  noncompliance 
and  is  subject  to  a  suit  for  damages  by  the  injured  employee,  or 
his  legal  representative  in  case  of  death,  in  which  he  is  deprived 
of  the  defences  of  contributory  negligence,  assumed  risk  and  neg- 
ligence of  a  fellow  servant.  By  insuring  in  the  State  fund,  or  by 
himself  or  his  insurance  carrier  paying  the  prescribed  compen- 
sation, the  employer  is  relieved  from  further  liability  for  personal 
injuries  or  death  sustained  by  employees.  Compensation  is  to 
be  made  without  regard  to  fault  as  a  cause  of  the  injury,  except 
where  it  is  occasioned  by  the  willful  intention  of  the  injured 
employee  to  bring  about  the  injury  or  death  of  himself  or  another 
or  results  solely  from  his  intoxication  while  on  duty.  Compensa- 
tion is  not  based  on  the  rule  of  damages  applied  in  negligence 


3  Doc.  Xo.  19 

suits  but  in  addition  to  providing  for  medical,  surgical  or  other 
attendances  or  treatment  and  funeral  expenses,  it  is  based  solely 
on  loss  of  earning  power.  Thus  the  risk  of  accidental  injuries 
occurring  with  or  without  fault  on  the  part  either  of  employee 
or  employer  is  shared  by  both  and  the  burden  of  making  com- 
pensation is  distributed  over  all  the  enumerated  hazardous  em- 
ployments in  proportion  to  the  risks  involved.  So  much  for  the 
general  outline  of  the  scheme  against  whose  justice  or  economic 
soundness  nothing,  that  occurs  to  me,  can  be  said. 

The   particular  provisions   requiring  construction  are  the  fol- 
lowing: 

"  Section  2.  Application.  Compensation  provided  for  in 
this  chapter  shall  be  payable  for  injuries  sustained  or  death 
incurred  by  employees  engaged  in  the  following  hazardous 
employements : 

'  Group  8.  The  operation,  within  or  without  the  State,  in- 
cluding repair,  of  vessels,  other  than  vessels  of  other  states 
or  countries  used  in  interstate  or  foreign  commerce,  when 
operated  or  repaired  by  1;he  company. 

Group  10.  Longshore  work,  including  the  loading  or  un- 
loading of  cargoes  or  parts  of  cargoes  of  grain,  coal,  ore, 
freight,  general  merchandise,  lumber  or  other  products  or 
materials,  or  moving  or  handling  the  same  on  any  dock,  plat- 
form or  place,  or  in  any  warehouse  or  other  place  of  storage." 
''Section  114.  Interstate  commerce.  The  provisions  of 
this  chapter  shall  apply  to  employers  and  employees  engaged 
in  intrastate,  and  also  in  interstate  or  foreign  commerce,  for 
whom  a  rule  of  liability  or  method  of  compensation  has  been 
or  may  be  established  by  the  congress  of  the  United  States, 
only  to  the  extent  that  their  mutual  connection  with  intra- 
state work  may  and  shall  be  clearly  separable  and  distinguish- 
able from  interstate  or  foreign  commerce,  except  that  such 
employer  and  his  employees  working  only  in  this  state  may, 
subject  to  the  approval  and  in  the  manner  provided  by  the 
commission  and  so  far  as  not  forbidden  by  any  act  of  con- 
gress, accept  and  become  bound  by  the  provisions  of  this 
chapter  in  like  manner  and  with  the  same  effect  in  all  re- 
spects as  provided  herein  for  other  employers  and  their  em- 
ployees." 


Dor.  Xo.  19  4 

It  is  claimed  that  loading  and  unloading'  are  included  in  "  op- 
eration "  and  that,  therefore,  the  case  falls  within  Group  8,  which 
excepts  vessels  of  other  states  or  countries  used  in  interstate  or 
foreign  commerce,  but  the  specific  enumeration  of  longshore  work 
in  Group  10  excludes  such  work  from  'the  other  group. 

It  is  next  claimed  that  the  statute  was  not  intended  to  apply 
to  employment  in  interstate  or  foreign  commerce  and  that  in  case 
of  donbt  that  construction  should  be  adopted,  for  otherwise  it 
would  offend  against  the  commerce  clause  of  the  Federal  Consti- 
tution by  imposing  a  burden  upon  such  commerce.  The  latter 
claim  will  be  noticed  first.  The  statute  does  not  purport  directly 
to  regulate  or  impose  a  burden  upon  commerce,  but  merely  under- 
takes to  regulate  the  relations  between  employers  and  employees 
in  this  State.  Such  regulation  may,  and,  no  doubt,  does,  indi- 
rectly affect  commerce,  but  to  the  extent  that  it  may  affect  inter- 
state or  foreign  commerce  it  is  plainly  within  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  State,  until  congress  by  entering  the  field  excludes  State 
action.  (Sherlock  v.  Ailing,  93  TJ.  S.  99 ;  Morgans  R.  R.  and 
Steamship  Co.  v.  Louisiana,  118  U.  S.  455;  Reid  v.  Colorado,  187 
IT.  S.  137;  Simpson  v.  Shepard,  230  U.  S.  352;  Erie  R,  Co.  v. 
Williams,  233  U.  S.  685.) 

Literally  construed,  Section  11-1  makes  the  statute  apply  only 
to  intrastate  work,  either  done  by  itself  or  in  connection  with,  but 
clearly  separable  and  distinguishable  from,  interstate  or  foreign 
commerce.  But,  though  the  section  is  awkwardly  phrased,  it  is 
manifest  that  a  broader  application  was  intended,  else  the  clause 
"  for  whom  a  rule  of  liability  or  method  of  compensation  has  been 
or  may  be  established  by  the  congress  of  the  United  States  "  is 
meaningless.  The  legislature  evidently  intended  to  regulate,  as 
far  as  it  had  the  power,  all  employments  within  the  State  of  the 
kinds  enumerated.  The  earlier  sections  are  in  terms  of  general 
application,  and  Section  114,  which  is  headed  "  Interstate  Com- 
merce ",  is  one  of  limitation,  not  of  definition.  Its  obvious  pur- 
pose was  to  guard  against  a  construction  violative  of  the  Constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States,  and  so  it  provided  that  the  act  should 
apply  to  interstate  or  foreign  commerce,  "  for  whom  a  rule  of 
liability  or  method  of  compensation  has  been  or  may  be  established 
by  the  congress  of  the  United  States  ",  only  to  the  extent  that  in- 


5  Doc.  No.  19 

trastate  work  affected  may  or  shall  be  clearly  separable  or  dis- 
tinguishable therefrom.  In  other  words  the  legislature  said  that 
it  did  not  intend  to  enter  any  field  from  which  it  had  been  or 
should  be  excluded  by  the  action  of  the  congress  of  the  United 
States.  But  it  is  said  that  congress  may  at  any  time  regulate  em- 
ployments in  interstate  or  foreign  commerce  and  that  the  case  is 
one  in  which  a  rule  "  may  be  established  ".  etc.  Again,  the  spirit, 
not  the  letter,  must  control.  If  it  had  been  intended  to  confine  the 
application  of  the  act  to  intrastate  work,  the  legislature  would 
doubtless  have  said  so  in  a  sentence.  The  words  "  may  be  "  should 
be  construed  in  the  sense  of  "  shall  be  ". 

One  other  question  in  respect  of  the  application  of  the  act  re- 
mains to  be  considered.  It  is  said  that  the  appellant  is  a  carrier 
by  railroad  and  that,  therefore,  the  Federal  Employer's  Liability 
Act  of  April  22,  1908  (35  Stat.  L.  65),  prescribes  the  rule  gov- 
erning the  employment  in  which  the  deceased  was  engaged.  As 
far  as  this  case  is  concerned  the  apellant  is  a  carrier  by  water.  Its 
business  is  transportation  by  steamships,  which,  as  far  as  appear-, 
may  not  even  indirectly  be  related  to  transportation  by  rail- 
road, certainly  not  by  any  particular  line  of  railroad.  It  is 
significant  that  the  earlier  Federal  Statute  of  June  11.  1906 
(34  Stat.  L.  232),  applied  to  "every  common  carrier7'  en- 
gaged in  interstate  or  foreign  commerce,  whilst  the  present  act 
applies  only  to  carriers  by  railroad.  There  is  nothing  in  the  act. 
indicative  of  a  purpose  to  apply  it  to  carriage  by  water,  if  it 
happen  to  be  conducted  by  a  railroad  corporation,  and  not  other- 
wise, to  apply  one  rule  of  liability  to  transportation  by  a  steamship 
line,  if  owned  and  operated  by  a  railroad  corporation,  and  a 
different  rule  to  precisely  similar  transportation  not  thus  con- 
trolled. The  Federal  Act  provides  a  rule  of  liability  of  carriers 
by  railroad  for  injury  or  death  "  resulting  in  whole  or  in  part 
.  by  reason  of  any  defect  or  insufficiency,  due  to  its  negli- 
gence, in  its  ears,  engines,  appliances,  machinery,  track,  roadbed, 
works,  boats,  wharves  or  other  equipment."  The  words  ''boats  " 
and  "  wharves  "  may  be  given  due  effect  by  applying  them  to  ad- 
juncts or  auxiliaries  to  transportation  by  railroad. 

Our  conclusion  therefore,  is  that  the  employment  in  which 
the  deceased  was  engaged  was  not  governed  by  the  Federal  Statute, 


Doc.  No.    19  G 

that  the  Workmen's  Compensation  Act  applied  to  it,  and  that  the 
latter  act  is  not  violative  of  the  Federal  Constitution  for  attempt- 
ing directly  to  regulate  or  impose  a  tax  or  burden  on  interstate  or 
foreign  commerce.  We  now  come  to  perhaps  the  most  important 
question  in  the  case.  Does  the  act  violate  the  Fourteenth  Amend- 
ment to  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  for  taking  property 
without  due  process  of  law  ? 

Much  reliance  is  placed  on  the  decision  of  this  court  in  Ives  v. 
South  Buffalo  By.  Co.  (201  X.  Y.  271.)  In  that  case  Judge 
Werner,  referring  to  the  appeal  on  economic  and  soeiologic 
grounds  and  speaking  for  the  court  said:  "We  have  already 
admitted  the  strength  of  this  appeal  to  a  recognized  and  widely 
prevalent  sentiment,  hut  we  think  it  is  an  appeal  which  must  be 
made  to  the  people  and  not  to  the  courts."  That  decision  was 
made  in  March,  1911.  Following  that  suggestion,  the  legislature 
provided  in  the  orderly  way  prescribed  by  the  Constitution  for 
the  submission  to  the  people  of  a  proposed  constitutional  amend- 
ment and  in  due  time  that  amendment  was  adopted  on  Xovember 
4th,  1913,  and  became  Section  19  of  Article  1  of  our  State  Con- 
stitution. It  is  unnecessary  to  set  that  amendment  forth  in 
extenso,  but  it  suffices  to  say  that  so  far  as  the  due  process  clause 
or  any  provision  of  our  State  Constitution  is  concerned  the  amend- 
ment amply  sustains  the  act.  However,  it  is  urged  that  the 
reasons  which  constrained  the  court  to  declare  the  act  involved  in 
the  Ives  case  unconstitutional,  are  equally  cogent  when  applied 
to  the  Fourteenth  Amendment.  In  the  first  place  it  is  to  be  ob- 
served that  the  two  acts  are  essentially  and  fundamentally  differ- 
ent. That  involved  in  the  Ives  case  made  the  employer  liable 
in  a  suit  for  damages  though  without  even  imputable  fault  and 
regardless  of  the  fault  of  the  injured  employee  —  short  of  serious 
and  willful  misconduct.  This  act  protects  both  employer  and 
employee,  the  former  from  wasteful  suits  and  extravagant  ver- 
dicts, the  latter  from  the  expense,  uncertainties  and  delays  of 
litigation  in  all  cases  and  from  the  certainty  of  defeat  if  unable 
to  establish  a  case  of  actionable  negligence.  Both  acts  arc  said 
to  have  been  based  on  the  proposition  that  the  risk  of  accidental 
injuries  in  a  hazardous  employment  should  be  borne  by  the  busi- 
ness and  that  loss  should  not  fall  on  the  injured  employee  and 


7  Doc   X«».   !'•» 

bis  dependents,  who  are  unable  to  bear  it  or  to  protect  themselves 
against  it.  That  act  made  no  attempt  to  distribute  the  burden, 
but  subjected  the  employer  to  a  suit  for  damages.  This  act  does 
in  fact  as  well  as  in  theory  distribute  the  burden  equitably  over 
the  industries  affected.  It  allows  compensation  only  for  loss  of 
earning  power,  but  by  the  creation  of  a  state  insurance  fund, 
or  by  the  substitute  methods  provided,  it  insures  the  prompt 
receipt  by  the  injured  employee  or  his  dependents  of  a  certain 
sum  undiminished  by  the  expenses  of  litigation.  The  two  acts 
are.  therefore,  so  plainly  dissimilar  that  the  decision  in  the  Ives 
case  is  not  controlling  in  this. 

Moreover,  upon  the  question  whether  an  act  offends  against 
the  constitution  of  the  United  States  the  decisions  of  the  United 
States  Supreme  Court  are  controlling.  The  only  one  of  the 
numerous  Workmen's  Compensation  Acts  which  appears  to  have 
been  directly  passed  on  by  the  United  States  Supreme  Court  is 
the  act  of  Ohio,  which  contained  an  optional  clause.  (Jeffrey  Mfg. 
Co.  v.  Blagg,  235  U.  S.  571.)  The  single  question  decided  in  that 
case  was  that  limiting  the  application  of  the  act  to  shops  with  five 
or  more  employees  did  not  result  in  arbitrary  and  unreasonable 
classification.  This  act  is  compulsory.  The  employer  is  subjected 
to  a  penalty  for  not  adopting  one  of  the  three  methods  of  insur- 
ance allowed  him,  and  the  employee  has  no  choice  at  all  except 
possibly  as  to  whether  he  will  enter  one  of  the  classified  employ- 
ments. However,  except  for  a  feature  presently  to  be  considered, 
the  decision  in  Noble  State  Bank  v.  Haskell  (219  U.  S.  104),  is 
decisive.  Indeed  upon  close  analysis  it  will  appear  that  the  taking 
justified  in  that  case  as  a  proper  exercise  of  the  police  power  was 
no  more  in  the  public  interest  than  that  involved  in  this  case 
and  that  the  mutual  benefits  to  the  parties  immediately  concerned 
were  not  as  direct.  In  that  case  an  act  of  the  State  of  Oklahoma 
requiring  every  bank  existing  under  the  state  laws  to  pay  an  as- 
sessment based  on  average  daily  deposits  into  a  guarantee  fund 
to  secure  the  full  repayment  of  deposits  in  case  any  such  bank 
became  insolvent  was  sustained  not  merely  under  the  reserve 
power  of  the  state  to  alter  or  repeal  charters  but  as  a  proper 
exercise  of  the  police  power.  Solvent  hanks  were  thus  required  to 
pay  money  into  a  fund  for  the  direct  benefit  of  others,  the  banks 


Doc.  No.   19  8 

benefiting  only  indirectly  from  the  supposed  benefit  to  commerce 
and  the  greater  stability  of  banking.  In  this  case  the  mutual 
benefits  are  direct.  Granted,  that  employers  are  compelled  to 
insure,  and  that  there  is  in  that  sense  a  taking.  They  insure 
themselves  and  their  employees  from  loss,  not  others.  The  pay- 
ment of  the  required  premiums  exempts  them  from  further  lia- 
bility. The  theoretical  taking  no  doubt  disappears  in  practical 
experience.  As  a  matter  of  fact  every  industrial  concern,  except 
the  very  large  ones  who  insure  themselves,  have  for  some  time 
been  forced  by  conditions,  not  by  law,  to  carry  accident  indemnity 
insurance.  A  relatively  small  part  of  the  sums  thus  paid  actually 
reached  injured  workmen  or  their  dependents.  AVith  the  economic 
saving  of  the  present  scheme,  insurance  in  the  long  run  should 
certainly  be  as  cheap  as  under  the  old  wasteful  plan,  and  the 
families  of  all  injured  workmen,  not  a  part  only,  will  receive 
some  compensation  for  the  loss  of  earning  power  of  the  wage 
earner.  We  should  consider  practical  experience  as  well  as 
theory  in  deciding  whether  a  given  plan  in  fact  constitutes  a 
taking  of  property  in  violation  of  the  constitution.  A  compulsory 
scheme  of  insurance  to  secure  injured  workmen  in  hazardous 
employments  and  their  dependents  from  becoming  objects  of 
charity  certainly  promotes  the  public  welfare  as  directly  as  does 
an  insurance  of  bank  depositors  from  loss. 

But  for  the  matter  now  to  be  considered  we  need  not  look  far- 
ther for  a  case  controlling  upon  us  and  in  principle  decisive  of 
this.  Whilst  the  Noble  State  Bank  case  was  referred  to  in  the 
Ives  case,  it  was  not  controlling  for  the  reason  that  the  State 
Constitution  was  involved  and  it  was  not  in  point  as  an  authority 
because  of  the  essential  differences  in  the  act  then  before  the  court, 
already  pointed  out. 

A  point  was  made  on  oral  argument  that  the  act  was  uncon- 
stitutional for  depriving  an  employee  injured  by  negligence  im- 
putable to  the  employer  of  a  right  of  action  for  the  wrong.  Of 
course,  the  employer  can  not  be  heard  to  urge  the  grievance  of 
the  employee  (Jeffrey  Mfg.  Co.  v.  Blagg,  supra),  but  exemption 
from  further  liability  upon  paying  the  required  premium  into  the 
State  fund  is  an  essential  element  of  the  scheme,  and  if  the  act 
be  unconstitutional  as  to  the  employee,  the  employer  would  be 
deprived  of  that  exemption  and  thus  would  be  directly  affected 


9  Doc.  No.  19 

by  the  unconstitutionality  of  the  act  in  that  respect.  It  is  not 
accurate  to  say  that  the  employee  is  deprived  of  all  remedy  for  a 
wrongful  injury.  He  is  given  a  remedy.  To  be  sure  the  com- 
pensation or  recovery  is  limited,  and  that  in  a  sense  may  possibly 
constitute  a  taking,  but  if  so,  it  is  his  contribution  to  an  insurance 
scheme  designed  for  his  benefit,  and  may  be  justified  on  precisely 
the  same  grounds  as  the  contribution  exacted  of  the  employer  has 
been.  When  he  enters  into  the  contract  of  employment,  he  is  now 
assured  of  a  definite  compensation  for  an  accidental  injury  oc- 
curring with  or  without  fault  imputable  to  the  employer  and  is 
afforded  a  remedy,  which  is  prompt,  certain  and  inexpensive.  In 
return  for  those  benefits,  he  is  required  to  give  up  the  doubtful 
privilege  of  having  a  jury  assess  his  damage,  a  considerable  part 
of  which,  if  recovered  at  all  after  long  delay,  must  go  to  pay  ex- 
penses and  lawyers'  fees. 

Moreover  the  act  does  not  deal  with  intentional  wrongs  but 
only  with  accidental  injuries,  and  no  account  is  taken  of  the 
presence  or  absence  of  negligence  attributable  to  the  employer. 
In  the  way  modern  undertakings  are  conducted,  it  is  rarely  possi- 
ble to  trace  personal  fault  to  the  employer,  but  he  has  been  held 
liable  for  wrongs  of  others  under  the  doctrine  of  respondeat  su- 
perior. That  doctrine  has  been  developed  by  the  courts  to  make 
the  principal  accountable  for  the  conduct  of  his  affairs,  though 
it  must  be  remembered  that  it  does  not  rest  on  the  doctrine  of 
agency.  No  one  has  a  vested  right  under  the  constitution  to  the 
maintenance  of  that  common  law  doctrine,  which  undoubtedly 
may  be  extended  or  curtailed  by  the  legislature.  No  one  doubts 
that  the  doctrine  of  assumption  of  risk  and  the  fellow  servant 
doctrine,  also  developed  by  the  courts  under  different  conditions 
than  those  now  prevailing,  may  be  limited  or  entirely  abrogated 
by  the  legislature.  Acts  having  that  effect  have  been  sustained 
by  repeated  decisions  of  this  court.  The  power  to  limit  or  take 
away  must  also  involve  the  power  to  extend.  At  the  common  law 
the  servant  was  held  to  assume  by  implied  contract  the  ordinary 
risks  of  the  employment,  including  the  risk  of  a  fellow  servant's 
negligence,  and  even  of  negligence  imputable  to  the  master  if  the 
danger  was  obvious,  or  with  knowledge  of  it  the  servant  volun- 
tarily continued  in  the  employment.  It  would  not  be  a  great 
extension  of  that  doctrine  for  the  legislature  to  provide  that  the 


Doc.  Xo.  19  10 

employee  should  assume  the  risk  of  all  accidental  injuries,  and  if 
than  can  he  done,  it  is  certainly  competent  for  the  legislature  to 
provide  by  the  creation  of  an  insurance  fund  for  a  limited  com- 
pensation to  the  employee  for  all  accidental  injuries,  regardless 
of  whether  there  was  a  cause  of  action  for  them  at  common  law. 

This  subject  should  be  viewed  in  the  light  of  modern  conditions, 
not  those  under  which  the  common  law  doctrines  were  developed. 
With  the  change  in  industrial  conditions,  an  opinion  has  gradually 
developed,  which  almost  universally  favors  a  more  just  and  eco- 
nomical system  of  providing  compensation  for  accidental  injuries 
to  employees  as  a  substitute  for  wasteful  and  protracted  damage 
suits,  usually  unjust  in  their  results  either  to  the  employer  or 
the  employee,  and  sometimes  to  both.  Surely  it  is  competent  for 
the  State  in  the  promotion  of  the  general  welfare  to  require  both 
employer  and  employee  to  yield  something  toward  the  establish- 
ment of  a  principle  and  plan  of  compensation  for  their  mutual 
protection  and  advantage.  Any  plan  devised  by  the  wit  of  man 
may  in  exceptional  cases  work  unjustly,  but  the  act  is  to  be 
judged  by  its  general  plan  and  s3ope  and  the  general  good  to  be 
promoted  by  it.  Fortunately  the  courts  have  not  attempted  to 
define  the  limits  of  the  police  power.  Its  elasticity  makes  progress 
possible  under  a  written  constitution  guaranteeing  individual 
rights.  The  question  is  often  one  of  degree.  The  act  now  before 
us  seems  to  be  fundamentally  fair  to  both  employer  and  employee. 
Of  course,  I  do  not  speak  of  details,  which  may  or  may  not  be 
open  to  criticism,  but  which,  granting  the  validity  of  the  under- 
lying principle,  are  plainly  within  the  province  of  the  legislature. 
It  is  not  open  to  the  objections,  found  to  bo  fatal  to  the  act  con- 
sidered in  the  Ives  case.  It  is  plainly  justified  by  the  amendment 
to  our  own  State  Constitution  and  the  decisions  of  the  United 
States  Supreme  Court,  notably  in  the  Noble  State  Bank  case,  make 
it  reasonably  certain  that  it  will  be  found  by  that  court  not  to 
be  violative  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States. 

The  order  of  the  Appellate  Division  should  be  affirmed  with 
costs. 

WlLLAKD    BartI/ETT,    Oil.    J.,    CoLLIN,    ClJDDEBACK,    CaRDOZO, 

and  Seabttry,  JJ.,  concur.     Werner,  J.,  not  sitting. 
Order  affirmed. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.   20 


REPORT  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  THE  LEGISLATURE, 
ITS  ORGANIZATION,  ETC.,  RELATIVE  TO  PRO- 
POSED AMENDMENT  No.  741  (Int.  697) 


Mr.  Lindsay,  from  the  Committee  on  The  Legislature,  its 
Organization,  etc.,  to  which  was  referred  the  Proposed  Consti- 
tutional Amendment,  entitled  "  Proposed  constitutional  amend- 
ment to  amend  Section  6  of  Article  III  of  the  Constitution, 
in  relation  to  the  compensation  and  expenses  of  members  of  the 
Legislature  "  (Int.  No.  697),  which  was  read  twice,  and  said  com- 
mittee recommends  that  the  same  be  referred  to  the  Committee  of 
the  Whole. 

The  following  reasons  are  presented  as  representing  the  views  of 
the  majority  in  support  of  said  report: 

The  present  rate  of  compensation  for  members  of  the  Legisla- 
ture was  fixed  by  a  constitutional  amendment  adopted  November 
3,  1874.  Prior  to  that  date,  under  the  Constitution  of  1846  it 
had  been  $3  per  day,  limited  to  $300  for  the  per  diem,  with  mile- 
age as  at  present.  The  Constitutional  Convention  of  1894  only 
continued  the  existing  compensation.  Legislators  are,  therefore, 
now  serving  for  a  compensation  considered  adequate  by  the  people 
of  the  State  forty-one  years  ago,  and  based  on  the  conditions  then 
existing.     Since  then  the  necessary  cost  of  living  has  greatly  in- 


Doc.  No.  20  2 

creased,  so  that  the  purchasing  power  of  a  dollar  then  and  now  is 
essentially  different.  Salaries  of  other  officers  and  employees  of 
the  State  have  from  time  to  time  been  greatly  increased.  It  is 
conceded,  we  think,  that  the  present  compensation  of  members  of 
the  Legislature  is  wholly  inadequate,  and  that  members  give  their 
time  and  service  to  the  State  at  an  actual  loss. 

The  Legislature  is  the  most  important  department  of  the  State, 
has  the  most  important  duties  to  perform  relative  to  the  man- 
agement of  affairs  of  the  State,  and  its  members  are  peculiarly  the 
agents  of  the  people  for  the  performance  of  those  duties,  it  is 
also  generally  conceded  that  the  Legislature  should  be  representa- 
tive of  all  classes  of  citizens,  rich  and  poor,  exalted  and  humble. 
At  the  present  rate  of  compensation  it  has  become  practically  im- 
possible for  a  poor  man  to  accept  the  office  and  properly  attend  to 
its  duties,  and  particularly  is  it  impossible  for  the  laboring  man 
whose  absence  not  only  prevents  him  from  otherwise  earning  sup- 
port for  his  family,  but  frequently  results  in  his  being  compelled, 
after  his  period  of  service,  to  seek  a  new  position.  The  committee 
does  not  believe  that  the  salary  should  be  made  so  large  as  to 
make  the  position  attractive  from  a  merely  money  point  of  view, 
but  it  does  believe  that  it  should  be  sufficient  to  reasonably  com- 
pensate for  services  of  the  member  of  the  State,  and  prevent  him 
from  actual  loss. 

The  provision  in  the  Proposed  Amendment  for  mileage,  the 
committee  believes  to  be  not  only  fair,  but  that  it  will  result  in 
equalizing  the  burdens  imposed  upon  members  residing  in  dif- 
ferent parts  of  the  State.  A  majority  of  the  committee  are  con- 
vinced that  the  small  increase  in  pay  proposed  by  this  amendment 
will  result  in  very  many  more  intelligent  and  well-qualified  per- 
sons aspiring  to  the  position,  and  that  the  general  result  will  be 
improvement  in  the  general  character  and  standing  of  the  Legis- 
lature. Finally,  the  committee  is  convinced  that  there  is  a  general 
demand  for  a  reasonable  increase  in  such  compensation,  and  that 
the  increase  proposed  is  reasonable  and  will  meet  the  approval 
of  the  voters  of  the  State.  Voters  are  not  unjust,  and  do  not 
demand  that  their  servants  shall  work  for  them  at  a  loss.  The 
vote  given  in  1011  for  the  amendment  to  increase  the  salary  of 
Assemblymen  to  $3,000,  and  of  Senators  to  $3,500,  with  mileage 
at  three  cents  per  mile  is  no  criterion.  It  is  true  that  amendment 
was  defeated,  principally  for  the  reason  that  nearly  half  the 
voters  failed  to  express  an  opinion  on  the  question;  and  it  is  sig- 
nificant that  the  entire  seven  amendments  submitted  that  year  all 
failed  of  passage.  Undoubtedly  the  great  objection  to  that  amend- 
ment, if  any,  would  be  that  it  provided  for  actual  mileage  at  three 


3  Doc.  No.  20 

cents  a  mile,  which  gave  the  impression  that  there  was  an  attempt 
to  make  money  out  of  the  mileage  over  its  actual  cost. 

Perhaps  the  strongest  evidence  of  this  general  demand  is  the 
action  taken  by  the  New  York  State  Federation  of  Labor,  set  forth 
in  its  memorial  of  June  8,  1915,  which  is  printed  as  Document 
No.  17  of  this  Convention.  Resolution  No.  17,  of  said  memorial 
is  as  follows: 

17.  Resolved,  With  a  view  of  having  the  members  of  the 
Legislature  in  a  more  independent  position  financially,  this 
conference  recommend  to  the  Constitutional  Convention  the 
wisdom  of  raising  the  salaries  of  the  members  of  the  Legis- 
lature to  an  adequate  amount. 

For  the  foregoing  reasons,  your  committee  recommends  the 
adoption  of  said  amendment. 

(Signed)  James  P.  Lindsay, 

For  the  majority  of  the  Committee. 

which    report    was    agreed    to,    and    said    Proposed    Amendment 
ordered  printed  and  referred  to   the  Committee  of  the  Whole. 
Air.  Brackett  presented  the  following  minority  report: 

To  the  Convention: 

With  great  respect  for  the  opinion  of  our  fellow  members  of 
the  Committee  on  Legislative  Organization,  we  feel  constrained 
to  dissent  from  the  report  of  the  committee  recommending  the 
raising  of  the  salaries  of  members  of  the  Legislature  from  $1,500, 
a  year,  as  now  established,  to  $2,500. 

Among  others,  these  are  our  reasons  for  such  dissent: 

1.  It  is  not  a  time  favorable  to  the  increase  of  official  salaries. 
It  should  always  be  remembered  that  the  expenses  of  the  State 

are  paid  in  part  by  persons  whose  incomes  are  smaller  than  the 
salaries  of  the  majority  of  the  public  servants,  to  which  payers 
any  increase  of  taxation  is  burdensome.  This  time  of  financial 
stress  should  not  be  seized  upon  to  increase  such  burden  in  the 
slightest  degree  if  it  is  avoidable.     It  is  avoidable  here. 

2.  We  do  not  forget  the  claim  that  many  salaries  are  now  so 
large  as  to  make  the  salary  of  legislators  ridiculously  small  in 
comparison.  Our  reply  is  that  such  present  disproportionately 
large  salaries  should  be  greatly  reduced,  rather  than  that  any 
attempt  be  here  made  to  grade  the  lower  up  to  them. 

The  public  service  is  no  place  in  which  to  amass  a  fortune.  It 
is  one  of  the  penalties  of  such  service  that  the  money  returns  there- 
for are,  and  must  remain,  very  moderate. 


Doc.  No.  20  4 

3.  There  are  two  lines  of  reasoning  with  respect  to  salaries  of 
those  in  the  State  service.  One  is  that  the  larger  salary  will  at- 
tract to  such  service  a  better  and  more  efficient  class  of  public 
servants;  the  other  that  such  larger  compensation  will  draw  to 
it  men  who  are  willing  to  become  professional  politicians,  with  a 
chief  view  of  drawing  the  salary  regardless  of  the  character  of  the 
service  rendered. 

We  believe  that  the  best  service  to  the  State  in  the  Legislature 
is  not  rendered  by  the  man  devoting  his  whole  time  to  political 
life  and  who  is  lured  by  the  salary,  but  rather  by  those  who,  busy 
in  their  own  affairs,  are  yet  willing  to  sacrifice  of  their  time  in 
serving  the  public  in  places  of  honor,  and  who  find  much  of  their 
compensation  for  such  service  in  the  confidence  and  regard  of  the 
constituency  electing  them  and  in  the  satisfaction  that  comes  from 
the  consciousness  of  duty  well  performed. 

It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  active  duties  of  a  member  of 
the  Legislature  are  not  continuous,  do  not  usually  engage  more 
than  about  a  third  of  the  year  and  that  they  are  so  distributed  as 
to  leave  reasonable  time  for  a  man  diligent  in  business  to  care 
somewhat  for  his  private  affairs,  while  still  well  serving  the  public. 

For  these  reasons,  believing  that  the  present  compensation  of 
$1,500,  a  year  for  each  legislator,  while  not  large,  is  still  sufficient 
to  indemnify  the  average  Senator  or  member  for  his  time  rendered 
and  expense  incurred  in  the  public  service,  we  present  this  minority 
report  for  the  consideration  of  the  Convention. 

July  14,  1915. 

(Signed)  Edgar  T.  Brackett, 

Lemuel  E.  Quigg, 
Thomas  A.  Kirby, 
Lewis  H.  Ford. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN   CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  21 


RULES  OF  THE  CONVENTION  REVISED  TO  JULY  15,  1915 


CHAPTER  I 
Powers  and  Duties  of  the  President  and  Vice-Presidents 

Rule  1.  The  President  shall  take  the  chair  each  day  at  the 
hour  to  which  the  Convention  shall  have  adjourned.  He  shall 
call  to  order,  and,  except  in  the  absence  of  a  quorum,  shall  proceed 
to  business  in  the  manner  prescribed  by  these  rules. 

Rule  2.  He  shall  possess  the  powers  and  perforin  the  duties 
herein  prescribed,  viz. : 

1.  He  shall  preserve  order  and  decorum,  and,  in  debate,  shall 
prevent  personal  reflections,  and  confine  members  to  the  question 
under  discussion.  When  two  or  more  members  rise  at  the  same 
time,  he  shall  name  the  one  entitled  to  the  floor. 

2.  He  shall  decide  all  questions  of  order,  subject  to  appeal  to 
the  Convention.  On  every  appeal  he  shall  have  the  right,  in  his 
place,  to  assign  his  reason  for  his  decision.  In  case  of  such  appeal 
no  member  shall  speak  more  than  once. 

3.  He  shall  appoint  all  committees,  except  where  the  Convention 
shall  otherwise  order. 

4.  He  may  substitute  any  member  to  perform  the  duties  of  the 
chair  during  the  absence  or  inability  of  both  vice-presidents,  but 


Doc.  No.  21  2 

for  no  longer  period  than  two  consecutive  legislative  days,  except 
by  special  consent  of  the  Convention. 

5.  When  the  Convention  shall  be  ready  to  go  into  Committee 
of  the  Whole,  he  shall  name  a  chairman  to  preside  therein,  subject 
to  right  of  the  committee  to  elect  its  own  chairman. 

6.  He  shall  certify  the  passage  of  all  amendments  by  the  Con- 
vention, with  the  date  thereof. 

7.  He  shall  designate  the  persons  who  shall  act  as  reporters  for 
the  public  press,  not  exceeding  thirty  in  number;  but  no  reporter 
shall  be  admitted  to  the  floor  who  is  not  an  authorized  representa- 
tive of  a  daily  paper.  Such  reporters,  so  appointed,  shall  be 
entitled  to  such  seats  as  the  President  shall  designate,  and  shall 
have  the  right  to  pass  to  and  fro  from  such  seats  in  entering  or 
leaving  the  Assembly  Chamber.  jSTo  reporter  shall  appear  before 
any  of  the  committees  in  advocacy  of,  or  in  opposition  to,  anything 
under  consideration  before  such  committees.  A,  violation  of  this 
rule  will  be  sufficient  cause  for  the  removal  of  such  reporter. 
Removal  for  this  cause  shall  be  vested  in  the  President. 

8.  He  shall  not  be  required  to  vote  in  ordinary  proceedings, 
except  where  his  vote  would  be  decisive.  In  case  of  a  tie  vote  the 
question  shall  be  lost.  He  shall  have  general  control,  except  as 
provided  by  rule  or  law,  of  the  Assembly  Chamber  and  of  the 
corridors  and  passages  in  that  part  of  the  Capitol  assigned  to  the 
use  of  the  Convention.  In  case  of  any  disturbance  or  disorderly 
conduct  in  the  galleries,  corridors  or  passages,  he  shall  have  the 
power  to  order  the  same  to  be  cleared,  and  may  cause  any  person 
guilty  of  such  disturbance  or  disorderly  conduct  to  be  brought 
before  the  bar  of  the  Convention.  In  all  such  cases  the  members 
present  may  take  such  measures  as  they  shall  deem  necessary  to 
prevent  a  repetition  of  such  misconduct,  either  by  the  infliction  of 
censure  or  pecuniary  penalty,  as  they  may  deem  best,  on  the 
parties  thus  offending. 

9.  He  shall  also  be  ex-ojjicio  member  and  chairman  of  the  Com- 
mittee on  Eules. 

10.  In  the  absence  of  the  President,  or  his  inability  to  preside, 
his  duties  shall  devolve  upon  the  First  Vice-President,  or,  if  he 
also  be  absent,  upon  the  Second  Vice-President. 

The  President  and  Vice-Presidents  shall  be  consulting  mem- 
bers, without  vote,  in  the  several  committees  to  which  they  shall 
not  have  been  specifically  appointed. 


3  Doc.  No.  21 

CHAPTER  II 
Order  of  Business 

Rule  3.  The  first  business  of  each  day's  session  shall  be  the 
reading  of  the  Journal  of  the  preceding  day,  and  the  correction 
of  any  errors  that  may  be  found  to  exist  therein.  Immediately 
thereafter,  except  oh  days  and  at  times  set  apart  for  the  considera- 
tion of  special  orders,  the  order  of  business  shall  be  as  follows : 

1.  Presentation  of  memorials.  Under  which  head  shall  be 
included  petitions,  remonstrances  and  communications  from  indi- 
viduals, and  from  public  bodies. 

2.  Communications  from  the  Governor  and  other  State  officers. 
Under  this  head  shall  be  embraced  also  communications  from 
public  officers  and  from  corporations  in  response  to  calls  for 
information. 

3.  Notices,  motions  and  resolutions,  to  be  called  for  by  districts, 
numerically. 

4.  Propositions  for  constitutional  amendment,  by  districts,  in 
numerical  order. 

5.  Reports  of  standing  committees  in  the  order  stated  in  Rule 
15. 

6.  Reports  of  select  committees. 

7.  Third  reading  of  proposed  constitutional  amendments. 

8.  Unfinished  business  of  general  orders. 

9.  Special  orders. 

10.  General  orders. 

Reports  from  the  Committee  on  Revision  and  Engrossment  may 
be  received  under  any  order  of  business. 

CHAPTER  III 
Rights  and  Duties  of  Members 

Rule  4.  Petitions,  memorials,  remonstrances  and  any  other 
papers  addressed  to  the  Convention  shall  be  presented  by  the 
President,  or  by  any  member  in  his  place,  read  by  their  titles, 
unless  otherwise  ordered,  and  referred  to  the  proper  committee. 

Rule  5.  Every  member  presenting  a  paper  shall  indorse  the 
same;  if  a  petition,  memorial,  remonstrance  or  communication  in 


Doc.  No.  21  4 

answer  to  a  call  for  information,  with,  a  concise  statement  of  its 
subject,  and  his  name;  if  a  notice  or  resolution,  with  his  name; 
if  a  proposition  for  constitutional  amendment,  with  a  statement 
of  its  title  and  his  name;  if  a  proposition  of  any  other  kind  for 
the  consideration  of  the  Convention,  with  a  statement  of  its 
subject,  the  proposer's  name,  and  the  reference,  if  any,  desired. 
A  report  of  a  committee  must  be  indorsed  with  a  statement  of 
such  report,  together  with  the  name  of  the  committee  making  the 
same,  and  shall  be  signed  by  the  chairman.  A  report  by  a 
minority  of  any  committee  shall  be  signed  by  the  members  ren- 
dering the  same. 

Rule  6.  Every  member  who  shall  be  within  the  bar  of  the  Con- 
vention, when  a  question  is  stated  from  the  chair,  shall  vote  thereon 
unless  he  be  excused  by  the  Convention,  or  unless  he  be  directly 
interested  in  the  question;  nor  shall  the  roll  of  absentees  be  more 
than  once  called.  The  bar  of  the  Convention  shall  be  deemed  to 
include  the  body  of  the  Convention  chamber. 

Rule  7.  Any  member  requesting  to  be  excused  from  voting  may 
make,  when  his  name  is  called,  a  brief  statement  of  the  reasons  for 
making  such  request,  not  exceeding  three  minutes  in  time,  and  the 
Convention,  without  debate,  shall  decide  if  it  will  grant  such 
request;  or  any  member  may  explain  his  vote,  for  not  exceeding 
three  minutes ;  but  nothing  in  this  rule  contained  shall  abridge  the 
right  of  any  member  to  record  his  vote  on  any  question  previous 
to  the  announcement  of  the  result. 

CHAPTER  IV 
Order  and  Decorum 

Rule  8.  No  member  rising  to  debate,  to  give  a  notice,  make  a 
motion,  or  present  a  paper  of  any  kind,  shall  proceed  until  he  shall 
have  addressed  the  President  and  been  recognized  by  him  as  en- 
titled to  the  floor.  While  the  President  is  putting  a  question  or  a 
count  is  being  had,  no  member  shall  speak  or  leave  his  place ;  and 
while  a  member  is  speaking  no  member  shall  entertain  any  private 
discourse  or  pass  between  him  and  the  Chair. 

Rule  9.  When  a  motion  to  adjourn,  or  for  recess,  shall  be 
carried,  no  member  or  officer  shall  leave  his  place  till  the  adjourn- 
ment or  recess  shall  be  declared  by  the  President. 


5  '  Dor.    No.  21 

Rule  10.   Xo  persons,  except  members  of  the  Convention  and 

officers  thereof,  shall  be  permitted  within  the  Secretary's  desk, 
or  the  rooms  set  apart  for  the  use  of  the  Secretary,  during  the 
session  of  the  Convention,  and  no  member  or  other  person  shall 
visit  or  remain  by  the  Secretary's  table  while  the  yeas  and  nays 
are  being  called,  except  officers  of  the  Convention  in  the  discharge 
of  their  duties. 

CHAPTER  V 

Order  of  Debate 

Rule  11.  No  member  shall  speak  more  than  once  on  the  same 
question  until  every  member  desiring  to  speak  on  such  question 
shall  have  spoken;  nor  more  than  twice  on  any  question  without 
leave  of  the  Convention. 

Rule  12.  If  any  member,  in  speaking,  transgress  the  rules  of 
the  Convention,  the  President  shall,  or  any  member  may,  call  him 
to  order,  in  which  case  the  member  so  called  to  order  shall  immedi- 
ately sit  down,  and  shall  not  rise  unless  to  explain  or  proceed  in 
order. 

Rule  13.  All  questions  relating  to  the  priority  of  one  question 
or  subject-matter  over  another,  under  the  same  order  of  business, 
the  postponement  of  any  special  order,  or  the  suspension  of  any 
rule,  shall  be  decided  without  debate. 

Rule  14.  All  questions  of  order,  as  they  shall  occur,  with  the 
decisions  thereon,  shall  be  entered  in  the  Journal,  and  at  the  close 
of  the  day's  session  a  statement  of  all  such  questions  and  decisions 
shall  be  printed  at  the  close  of  and  as  an  appendix  to  the  Journal. 

CHAPTER  VI 
Committees  and  Their  Duties 
Rule  15.   The  President  shall  appoint  the  following  standing 
committees  to  report  upon  the  subjects  named  and  such  others 
as  may  be  referred  to  them,  viz. : 

1.  On  the  bill  of  rights,  to  consist  of  eleven  members. 

2.  On  the  Legislature,  its  organization,  and  the  number,  appor- 
tionment, election,  tenure  of  office  and  compensation  of  its  mem- 
bers, to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 


Doc.  No.  21  G 

3.  On  the  powers,  limitations  and  duties  of  the  Legislature, 
except  as  to  matters  otherwise  referred,  to  consist  of  seventeen 
members. 

4.  On  the  right  of  suffrage  and  the  qualifications  to  hold  office, 
to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

5.  On  the  Governor  and  other  State  officers,  their  election  or 
appointment,  tenure  of  office,  compensation,  powers  and  duties, 
except  as  otherwise  referred,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

G.   On  the  judiciary,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

7.  On  the  State  finances,  revenues,  expenditures,  and  restric- 
tions on  the  powers  of  the  Legislature  in  respect  thereto,  and  to 
public  indebtedness,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

8.  On  cities,  their  organization,  government  and  powers,  to 
consist  of  seventeen  members. 

9.  On  canals,  to  consist  of  eleven  members. 

10.  On  public  utilities,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

11.  On  counties,  towns  and  villages,  their  organization,  govern- 
ment  and  powers,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

12.  On  county,  town  and  village  officers,  other  than  judicial, 
their  election  or  appointment,  tenure  of  office,  compensation, 
powers  and  duties,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

13.  On  State  prisons  and  penitentiaries,  and  the  prevention 
and  punishment  of  crime,  to  consist  of  eleven  members. 

14.  On  corporations  and  institutions,  not  otherwise  herein 
specified,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

15.  On  currency,  banking  and  insurance,  to  consist  of  eleven 
members. 

1G.  On  the  militia  and  military  affairs,  to  consist  of  seven 
members. 

17.  On  education  and  the  funds  relating  thereto,  to  consist  of 
seventeen  members. 

18.  On  charities  and  charitable  institutions,  to  consist  of  sev- 
enteen members. 

19.  On  industrial  interests  and  relations,  except  those  already 
referred,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

20.  On  the  conservation  of  the  natural  resources  of  the  State> 
to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 


7  Doc.  No.  21 

.21.  On  the  relations  of  the  State  to  the  Indians  residing  therein, 
to  consist  of  seven  members. 

22.  On  future  amendments  and  revisions  of  the  Constitution, 
to  consist  of  seven  members. 

23.  Revision  and  engrossment,  to  consist  of  seven  members. 

24.  Privileges  and  elections,  to  consist  of  eleven  members. 

25.  Printing,  to  consist  of  seven  members. 

20.   Contingent  expenses,  to  consist  of  seven  members. 

27.  Rules,  to  consist  of  seven  members,  and  the  President. 

28.  On  the  civil  service,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

29.  On  library  and  information. 

30.  On  taxation,  to  consist  of  seventeen  members. 

Pule  16.  The  several  committees  shall  consider  and  report, 
without  unnecessary  delay,  upon  the  respective  matters  referred 
to  them  by  the  Convention.  ~No  favorable  or  adverse  report  by 
any  committee,  upon  a  proposed  constitutional  amendment,  shall 
be  made  except  by  a  majority  of  all  the  members  of  the  committee. 
A  minority  of  a  committee  may  express  its  views  in  a  report. 

Rule  17.  The  Committee  on  Revision  and  Engrossment  shall 
examine  and  correct  the  constitutional  amendments  which  are 
referred  to  it,  for  the  purpose  of  avoiding  inaccuracies,  repeti- 
tions and  inconsistencies.  It  shall  also  carefully  examine  in  the 
order  in  which  they  shall  be  directed  by  the  Convention  to  be 
engrossed  for  a  third  reading,  all  constitutional  amendments  so 
engrossed,  and  see  that  the  same  are  correctly  engrossed,  and  shall 
immediately  report  the  same  in  like  order  to  the  Convention  before 
they  are  read  the  third  time. 

Rule  18.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Committee  on  Printing  to 
examine  and  report  on  all  questions  of  printing  referred  to  them ; 
to  examine  from  time  to  time,  and.  ascertain  whether  the  prices 
charged  for  printing,  and  the  quantities  and  qualities  furnished, 
are  in  conformity  to  the  orders  of  the  Convention  and  to  the  con- 
ditions fixed  by  it;  to  ascertain  and  report  the  number  of  copies 
to  be  printed,  and  how  distributed ;  and  to  report  to  the  Conven- 
tion from  time  to  time,  any  measures  they  may  deem  useful  for 
the  economical  and  proper  management  of  the  Convention 
printing. 


Doc.  Xo.  21  8 

Rule  19.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Committee  on  Contingent 
Expenses  to  inquire  into  the  expenditures  of  the  Convention,  and 
whether  the  same  are  being  or  have  been  made  in  conformity  to 
law  and  the  orders  of  the  Convention,  and  whether  proper  vouchers 
exist  for  the  same,  and  whether  the  funds  provided  for  the  purpose 
are  economically  applied,  and  to  report,  from  time  to  time,  such 
regulations  as  may  conduce  to  economy  and  secure  the  faithful 
disbursement  of  the  money  appropriated  by  law. 

CHAPTER  VII 

General  Orders  and  Special  Orders 

Rule  20.  The  matters  referred  to  the  Committee  of  the  "Whole 
Convention  shall  constitute  the  general  orders,  and  their  titles 
shall  be  recorded  in  a  calendar  kept  for  that  purpose  by  the  Sec- 
retary, in  the  order  in  which  they  shall  be  severally  referred. 

Rule  21.  The  business  of  the  general  orders  shall  be  taken  up 
in  the  following  manner,  viz. :  The  Secretary  shall  announce  the 
title  of  each  proposed  amendment  or  other  matter,  as  it  shall  be 
reached  in  its  order,  whereupon  it  shall  be  taken  up  on  the  call 
of  any  member,  without  the  putting  of  a  question  therefor,  but 
if  not  so  moved,  it  shall  lose  its  precedence  for  the  day.  And 
whenever  three  proposed  amendments  or  other  matters  have  been 
thus  moved  the  Convention  shall  go  into  Committee  of  the  Whole 
upon  them  without  further  order. 

Rule  22.  Tuesday  and  Thursday  of  each  week  shall  be  set  apart 
especially  for  the  consideration  of  the  general  orders ;  but  they 
may  be  considered  on  any  other  day  when  reached  in  their  order. 

Rule  23.  Each  member  shall  be  furnished  daily  with  a  printed 
list  of  the  general  orders,  which  shall  be  kept  on  his  files  by  the 
Sergeant-at-Arms,  in  the  same  manner  as  other  printed  documents. 

Rule  24.  Any  matter  may  be  made  a  special  order  for  any  par- 
ticular day,  by  the  acceptance  of  the  report  of  the  Committee  on 
Rules,  or  by  a  two-thirds  vote,  or  by  unanimous  consent. 

CHAPTER  VIII 
Committee  of  the  Whole 
Rule  25.   Any  matter  may  be  committed  to  the  Committee  of 
the  Whole  upon  the  report  of  a  standing  or  select  committee,  or 


9  Doc.  Xo.  21 

by  unanimous  consent  at  any  time.  Any  committee  may  be  dis- 
charged from  the  further  consideration  of  any  matter  referred  to 
it,  and  such  matter  may  then  be  referred  to  the  Committee  of  the 
Whole,  by  a  vote  of  the  Convention.  The  same  rules  shall  be  ob- 
served in  the  Committee  of  the  Whole  as  in  the  Convention,  so  far 
as  the  same  are  applicable,  except  that  the  previous  question  shall 
not  apply,  nor  the  yeas  and  nays  be  taken,  nor  a  limit  be  made 
as  to  the  number  of  times  of  speaking. 

Rule  20.  A  motion  to  "  rise  and  report  progress"  shall  be  in 
order  at  any  stage,  and  shall  be  decided  without  debate.  A,  mo- 
tion to  rise  and  report  is  not  in  order  until  each  section  and  the 
title  have  been  considered,  unless  the  limit  of  time  has  expired. 

Rule  27.  Proposed  Constitutional  amendments  and  other  mat- 
ters shall  be  considered  in  Committee  of  the  Whole  in  the  follow- 
ing manner,  viz. :  They  shall  be  first  read  through,  if  the  commit- 
tee so  direct ;  otherwise  they  shall  be  read  and  considered  by  sec- 
tions. When  the  limit  of  time  has  expired,  the  amendments  which 
have  been  proposed  and  not  previously  acted  upon  shall  be  voted 
upon  in  their  order  without  further  debate.  The  proposed  con- 
stitutional amendment  as  amended  shall  then  be  voted  upon  with- 
out debate,  and  the  committee  shall  then  rise  and  report  in 
accordance  with  the  action  which  it  has  taken. 

If  the  committee  shall  have  adopted  any  proposed  Constitutional 
amendment,  the  same  shall  be  reported  complete  with  any  amend- 
ments made  in  the  committee  incorporated  in  their  proper  places. 

Rule  28.  If  at  any  time,  when  in  Committee  of  the  Whole,  it 
be  ascertained  that  there  is  no  quorum,  the  chairman  shall  im- 
mediately report  the  fact  to  the  President,  who  then  takes  the  chair 
for  the  purpose  of  securing  a  quorum,  and  when  that  is  obtained 
the  chairman  resumes  his  duties. 

Rule  29.  Should  the  committee  not  have  completed  the  business 
before  it  rises,  the  chairman  will  report  progress  and  ask  leave  to 
sit  again. 

CHAPTER  IX 
Proposed   Amendments   to   the    Constitution 

Rule  30.  JNTo  proposition  for  Constitutional  amendment  shall  be 
introduced  in  the  Convention  except  in  one  of  the  following 
modes,  viz. : 


Doc.  No.  21  10 

1.  Under  the  order  of  introduction  of  propositions  for  consti- 
tutional amendment  by  districts,  in  numerical  order. 

2.  By  report  of  a  committee. 

Eule  31.  The  title  of  each  proposition  for  Constitutional  amend- 
ment introduced  shall  state  concisely  its  subject-matter.  Matter 
which  it  is  proposed  to  strike  out  shall  be  in  brackets,  and  new 
matter  shall  be  underscored  and  when  printed  shall  be  in  italics. 
All  proposed  amendments  shall  be  presented  in  duplicate. 

Rule  32.  Ail  propositions  for  Constitutional  amendment,  after 
their  second  reading,  which  shall  be  by  title,  shall  be  referred  to 
a  standing  or  select  committee,  to  consider  and  report  thereon, 
and  shall  be  immediately  printed  and  placed  on  the  files  of  each 
member.  All  proposed  Constitutional  amendments  reported  favor- 
ably shall  be  committed  to  the  Committee  of  the  Whole  and  imme- 
diately printed  unless  a  different  order  be  made  not  inconsist- 
ent with  Rule  34.  When  a  committee  has  reported  that  no 
amendment  should  be  made  to  the  provisions  of  the  existing  Con- 
stitution relating  to  any  specified  subject,  and  such  report  is 
agreed  to,  all  propositions  for  Constitutional  amendment  relating 
to  that  subject  which  have  been  referred  to  that  committee  shall 
be  considered  as  rejected.  All  Constitutional  amendments  pro- 
posed by  a  minority  report  from  any  committee  shall  be  printed 
and  placed  on  the  files  of  the  members  of  the  Convention. 

Eule  33.  Proposed  Constitutional  amendments  reported  by  the 
Committee  of  the  Whole  shall  be  subject  to  debate  before  the  ques- 
tion to  agree  with  the  committee  on  their  report  is  put. 

Rule  34.  Xo  proposed  Constitutional  amendment  shall  be  or- 
dered to  a  third  reading  until  it  shall  have  been  considered  in 
Committee  of  the  Whole. 

Rule  35.  JSio  proposed  Constitutional  amendment  shall  be  put 
upon  third  reading  until  it  shall  have  been  reported  by  the  Com- 
mittee on  Revision  and  Engrossment  as  correctly  revised  and  en- 
grossed, unless  by  unanimous  consent.  Nor  shall  any  proposed 
Constitutional  amendment  be  read  the  third  time,  unless  it  shall 
have  been  once  printed. 

Rule  36.  Every  proposed  Constitutional  amendment  shall  re- 
ceive  three  separate  readings,  previous  to  its  final  passage,  and 
the  third  reading  shall  be  on  a  day  subsequent  to  that  on  which 


11  Doc.  i\To.  21 

the  proposed  Constitutional  amendment  passed  in  Committee  of 
the  Whole. 

Rule  37.  The  third  reading  of  proposed  Constitutional  amend- 
ments shall  take  place  in  the  order  in  which  they  have  been  or- 
dered to  a  third  reading-,  unless  the  Convention,  by  a  vote  of  two- 
thirds  of  the  members  present,  direct  otherwise,  or  the  proposed 
Constitutional  amendment  to  be  read  is  laid  on  the  table.  A,nd 
the  question  on  the  final  passage  of  every  proposed  Constitutional 
amendment  shall  be  taken  immediately  after  such  third  reading, 
and  without  debate,  but  the  vote  on  the  final  passage  of  every  pro- 
posed amendment,  revision  or  addition  to  the  Constitution  shall 
be  taken  by  ayes  and  nays,  which  shall  be  entered  on  the  Journal. 

Rule  38.  In  all  cases  where  unanimous  consent  is  asked  for 
advancing  a  proposed  Constitutional  amendment  out  of  its  order, 
it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  President  to  plainly  announce  such 
request  in  full  twice. 

Rule  30.  On  the  third  reading  of  a  proposed  Constitutional 
amendment,  after  the  reading  of  the  title,  and  before  the  reading 
of  the  text,  the  proposed  Constitutional  amendment  shall  be  open 
one  hour,  if  required,  for  debate  on  its  merits,  before  the  previous 
question  shall  be  ordered ;  but  no  member  shall  speak  more  than 
five  minutes  or  more  than  once;  the  vote,  however,  may  be  taken 
at  any  time  when  the  debate  is  closed. 

Rule  40.  On  the  third  reading  of  the  proposed  Constitutional 
amendment,  no  amendment  thereto  shall  be  in  order,  except  to  fill 
blanks,  without  unanimous  consent. 

Rule  41.  A  motion  may  be  made  during  the  third  reading  of 
any  proposed  Constitutional  amendment  to  recommit  it,  and  such 
motion  shall  not  be  debatable. 

Rule  42.  A  register  shall  be  kept  by  the  Secretary  of  all  pro- 
posed Constitutional  amendments  introduced  in  the  Convention, 
in  which  shall  be  recorded,  under  appropriate  heads,  the  progress 
of  such  proposed  Constitutional  amendments  from  the  date  of 
their  introduction  to  the  time  of  their  final  disposition. 

Rule  43.  In  all  cases  where  a  proposed  Constitutional  amend- 
ment, order,  motion  or  resolution  shall  be  entered  on  the  Journal, 
the  name  of  the  member  introducing  or  moving  the  same  shall  also 
be  entered  on  the  Journal. 


Doc.  J\To.  21 


12 


CHAPTER  X 
Motions  and  Their  Precedence 
Rule  44.  When  a  question  is  under  consideration,  the  following 
motions  only  shall  be  received ;  which  motions  shall  have  prece- 
dence in  the  order  stated,  viz. : 
Motions  to,  or  for: 

1.  Adjourn  for  the  day. 

2.  Recess. 

3.  Call  of  the  Convention. 

4.  Previous  question. 

5.  Lav  on  the  table. 


>    Xot  amendable  or  debatable. 


0. 

7. 

8. 

9. 
10. 
11. 


Preclude  debates  on 
main  question. 


Postpone  indefinitely,  not  amendable,  but  debatable. 
Postpone  to  a  certain  day. 
Go  into  Committee  of  the  Whole. 
Commit  to  Committee  of  the  Whole. 
Commit  to  a  standing  committee. 
Commit  to  a  select  committee. 
12.  Amend. 

Rule  45.  Every  motion  or  resolution  shall  be  stated  by  the 
President  or  read  by  the  Secretary  before  debate,  and  again,  if 
requested  by  any  member,  immediately  before  putting  the  ques- 
tion ;  and  every  motion,  except  those  specified  in  subdivisions  1  to 
11,  inclusive,  of  rule  44,  shall  be  reduced  to  writing  if  the  Presi- 
dent or  any  member  request  it. 

Rule  46.  After  a  motion  shall  be  stated  by  the  President,  it 
shall  bo  deemed  in  the  possession  of  the  Convention,  but  may  be 
withdrawn  at  any  time  before  it  shall  be  decided  or  amended. 

Rule  47.  The  motion  to  adjourn,  to  take  a  recess,  and  to  ad- 
journ for  a  longer  period  than  one  day.  shall  always  be  in  order; 
but  the  latter  motion  shall  not  preclude  debate. 

Rule  48.  A  motion  to  reconsider  any  vote  must  be  made  or 
the  same  day  on  which  the  vote  proposed  to  be  reconsidered  was 
taken,  or  on  the  legislative  day  next  succeeding,  and  by  a  member 
who  voted  in  the  majority,  except  to  reconsider  a  vote  on  the  final 
passage  of  a  proposed  Constitutional  amendment,  which  shall  be 
Such  motion  may  In1  made  under  any 


13  Doc  No.  21 

order  of  business,  but  shall  be  considered  only  under  the  order  of 
business  in  which  the  vote  proposed  to  be  reconsidered  occurred. 
When  a  motion  for  reconsideration  is  decided,  that  decision  shall 
not  be  reconsidered,  and  no  question  shall  be  twice  reconsidered ; 
nor  shall  any  vote  be  reconsidered  upon  either  of  the  following 
motions : 

To  adjourn. 

To  lay  on  the  table. 

To  take  from  the  table ;  or 

For  the  previous  question. 

Rule  49.  Xo  amendment  to  a  motion  shall  be  received  while 
another  is  pending,  unless  it  be  an  amendment  to  the  amendment 
and  germane  to  the  subject. 

CHAPTER  XI 
Of  Resolutions 

Rule  50.  The  following  classes  of  resolutions  shall  lie  over  one 
day  for  consideration,  after  which  they  may  be  called  up,  as  of 
course,  under  their  appropriate  order  of  business: 

1.  Except  as  provided  in  Rule  56,  all  resolutions  giving  rise  to 
debate,  whether  reported  by  a  committee  or  otherwise  introduced, 
unless  they  relate  to  the  disposition  of  business  immediately  before 
the  Convention,  to  the  business  of  the  day  on  which  they  may  be 
offered,  or  to  adjournments  or  recesses,  shall  lie  over  one  day  for 
consideration,  after  which  they  may  be  called  up,  as  of  course, 
under  their  appropriate  order  of  business. 

2.  Resolutions  containing  calls  for  information  from  any  of  the 
executive  departments,  from  State,  county  or  municipal  officers,  or 
from  any  corporate  bodies,  shall  be  referred  to  the  appropriate 
committee.  Such  committee  shall  report  thereon  within  three 
legislative  days. 

Rule  51.  All  resolutions  for  the  printing  of  an  extra  number 
of  documents  shall  be  referred,  as  of  course,  to  the  standing  Com- 
mittee on  Printing,  for  their  report  thereon  before  final  action  by 
the  Convention. 

Rule  52.  All  resolutions  authorizing  or  contemplating  expendi- 
tures for  the  purposes  of  the  Convention  shall  be  referred  to  the 


Doc.  No.  21  14 

standing'   Committee   on    Contingent    Expenses,    for   their   report 
thereon  before  final  action  by  the  Convention. 

CHAPTER  XII 

The  Previous  Question 

Rule  53.  The  "previous  question"  shall  be  put  as  follows: 
"  Shall  the  main  question  now  be  put  ?  "  and  until  it  is  decided, 
shall  preclude  all  amendments  or  debate.  When,  on  taking  the 
previous  question,  the  Convention  shall  decide  that  the  main  ques- 
tion shall  not  now  be  put,  the  main  question  shall  be  considered 
as  still  remaining  under  debate.  The  "  main  question  "  shall  be 
on  the  passage  of  the  proposed  amendment  to  the  Constitution, 
resolution  or  other  matter  under  consideration,  but  when  amend- 
ments thereto  are  pending,  the  question  shall  first  be  taken  upon 
such  amendments  in  their  order,  and  when  adopted  in  Committee 
of  the  Whole,  and  not  acted  on  in  the  Convention,  the  question 
shall  be  taken  upon  such  amendments  in  like  order. 

CHAPTER  XIII 
The  Convention  Chamber  and  Privileges  of  Admission  to  the 

Floor 

Rule  54.  The  following  classes  of  persons,  besides  officers  and 
members  of  the  Convention,  shall  be  entitled  to  admission  to  the 
floor  of  the  Convention  during  the  session  thereof,  viz. : 

1.  Governor,  Lieutenant-Governor,  and  ex-Governors  of  the 
State. 

2.  Judges  of  the  Court  of  Appeals  and  of  the  Supreme  Court. 

3.  Members  of  former  Constitutional  Conventions. 

4.  The  members  of  the  Senate  and  Assembly  and  ex-Speakers. 

5.  The  State  officers,  deputies  and  commissioners. 

6.  The  Regents  of  the  University. 

7.  United  States  Senators  and  Congressmen. 

8.  The  Capitol  Commissioners. 

9.  Persons  in  the  exercise  of  an  official  duty  directly  connected 
with  the  business  of  the  Convention. 

10.  The  reporters  for  the  press,  as  provided  by  subdivision  7 
of  rule  2. 


15  Doc.  No.  21 

No  other  person  shall  be  admitted  to  the  floor  during  the  session, 
except  upon  the  permission  of  the  President  or  by  vote  of  the  Con- 
vention ;  and  persons  so  admitted  shall  be  allowed  to  occupy  places 
only  in  the  seats  in  the  rear  of  the  Assembly  Chamber.  All  per- 
mits granted  by  the  President  may  be  revoked  by  him  at  pleasure, 
or  upon  the  order  of  the  Convention.  Xo  person  shall  be  entitled 
to  the  privileges  of  the  floor  of  the  Convention  as  a  legislative  re- 
porter of  a  newspaper  who  is  interested  in  pending  or  contemplated 
constitutional  revision,  or  who  is  employed  by,  or  receives  com- 
pensation from,  any  corporation,  except  a  newspaper,  news  or  press 
association.  The  doors  of  the  Convention  shall  be  kept  open  to 
the  public  during  all  its  sessions. 

CHAPTER  XIV 
General  Rules 

Rule  5o.  Equivalent  motions,  resolutions  or  amendments 
thereto,  shall  not  be  entertained.  If  any  question  contains  several 
distinct  propositions,  it  shall  be  divided  by  the  Chair  at  the  request 
of  any  member,  but  a  motion  to  "  strike  out  and  insert  "  shall  be 
indivisible. 

Rule  56.  All  proposed  action  touching  the  rules  and  orders  of 
business  shall  be  referred,  as  of  course,  to  the  Committee  on 
Rules ;  such  committee  may  sit  during  the  session  of  the  Conven- 
tion without  special  leave,  and  report  at  any  time  on  rules  or  order 
of  business  so  referred  to  them.  It  will  be  in  order  to  call  up 
for  consideration  at  any  time  a  report  from  the  Committee  on 
Rules.  Any  member  may  object  to  its  consideration  until  the  next 
legislative  day,  and,  if  sustained  by  twenty-four  other  members, 
the  consideration  shall  be  so  postponed,  but  only  once.  Pending  the 
final  consideration  thereof,  but  one  motion,  except  by  unanimous 
consent,  that  the  Convention  adjourn,  may  be  entertained,  and 
no  other  dilatory  motion  shall  be  entertained  until  such  report  is 
fully  disposed  of.  A  motion  to  suspend  the  rules  shall  in  all  cases 
be  made  upon  one  day's  notice  which  shall  state  specifically  the 
object  of  the  suspension,  and  every  case  of  suspension  of 
a  rule  under  such  notice  and  motion  shall  be  held  to  apply 
only  to  the  object  specified  therein.  Provided  that  when 
ordered  so  to  do  by  the  Convention  a  standing  committee  shall 
make  a  report  on  a  Constitutional  amendment  or  other  subject,  the 


Doc.  No.  21  16 

Committee  on  Rules  shall  report  a  rule  limiting  the  time  for  de- 
bate; and  upon  such  report  no  member  shall  speak  more  than 
once,  nor  more  than  five  minutes.  Such  report  shall  stand  as 
the  time  limited  for  debate  on  the  subject-matter  referred  to  in 
such  rule,  and  the  previous  question  or  other  motion  to  close  debate 
shall  not  be  in  order  until  the  expiration  of  the  time  so  allotted, 
or  the  debate  has  been  closed;  the  time  thus  allotted  for  debate 
shall  be  equally  divided  between  those  in  favor  and  those  opposed 
to  the  subject-matter  under  consideration.  All  questions  or  mo- 
tions authorized  by  this  rule  shall  be  decided  at  once  without  delay 
or  debate,  except  as  herein  expressly  allowed. 

Rule  57.  The  yeas  and  nays  may  be  taken  on  any  question 
whenever  so  required  by  any  fifteen  members  (unless  a  division  by 
yeas  and  nays  be  already  pending),  and  when  so  taken  shall  be 
entered  on  the  Journal. 

Rule  58.  When  the  Convention  shall  be  equally  divided  on  any 
question,  including  the  President's  vote,  the  question  shall  be 
deemed  to  be  lost. 

Rule  59.  In  considering  the  report  of  the  Committee  on  Re- 
vision and  Engrossment,  each  article  shall  be  open  to  amendment 
germane  to  such  changes  as  may  have  been  reported  by  the  com- 
mittee, without  previous  notice,  but  no  one  shall  speak  more  than 
five  minutes,  or  more  than  once,  on  any  proposition  to  amend. 

Rule  GO.  AYhen  a  blank  is  to  be  filled  and  different  sums  or 
times  shall  be  proposed,  the  question  shall  be  first  taken  on  the 
highest  sum  and  the  longest  time. 

Rule  61.  A  majority  of  the  Convention  shall  const itute  a 
quorum.  In  all  cases  of  the  absence  of  members  during  the  sessions 
the  members  present  shall  take  such  measures  as  they  shall  deem 
necessary  to  secure  the  presence  of  absentees,  and  may  inflict  such 
censure  or  pecuniary  penalty  as  they  may  deem  just  on  those  who, 
on  being  called  on  for  that  purpose,  shall  not  render  sufficient 
excuse  for  their  absence.  JSTo  constitutional  amendment  shall  be 
adopted  unless  by  the  assent  of  a  majority  of  all  the  members 
elected  to  the  Convention. 

Rule  62.  For  the  purpose  of  securing  the  attendance  of  mem- 
bers, a  call  of  the  Convention  may  be  made,  but  such  call  shall  not 
be  in  order  after  the  main  question  has  been  ordered,  nor  after 


17  Doc.  No.  21 

the  voting  on  any  question  has  commenced,  nor  after  the  third 
reading  of  an  amendment  has  been  completed. 

Rule  63.  When  less  than  a  quorum  vote  on  any  subject  under 
consideration  by  the  Convention,  it  shall  be  in  order,  on  motion, 
to  close  the  bar  of  the  Convention,  whereupon  the  roll  of  members 
shall  be  called  by  the  Secretary,  and  if  it  is  ascertained  that  a 
quorum  is  present,  either  by  answering  to  their  names  or  by  their 
presence  in  the  Convention,  the  yeas  and  nays  shall  again  be 
ordered  by  the  President,  and  if  any  member  present  refuses  to 
vote,  such  refusal  shall  be  deemed  a  contempt,  and  any  member  or 
members  so  offending  shall  be  cited  before  the  Committee  on  Privi- 
leges and  Elections,  which,  after  inquiry,  shall  report  to  the  Con- 
vention for  such  action  as  the  facts  shall  seem  to  warrant,  and, 
unless  purged,  the  Convention  may  order  the  Sergeant-at-Arms  to 
remove  said  member  or  members  without  the  bar  of  the  Conven- 
tion, and  all  privileges  of  membership  shall  be  refused  the  person 
or  persons  so  offending  until  the  contempt  be  duly  purged. 

Rule  04.  Whenever  any  person  shall  be  brought  before  the  bar 
of  the  Convention  for  adjudged  breach  of  its  privileges,  no  debate 
shall  be  in  order,  but  the  President  shall  proceed  to  execute  the 
judgment  of  the  Convention  without  delay  or  debate. 

Rule  05.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Secretary  to  keep  the 
Journal  of  each  day's  proceedings,  which  shall  be  printed  and  laid 
on  the  table  of  members  on  the  morning  after  its  approval.  In 
addition  to  his  other  duties,  he  shall  prepare  and  supervise  the 
printing  of  the  calendars  of  the  orders  of  the  day  and  cause  them 
to  be  placed  on  the  files  before  the  beginning  of  each  day's  session. 
All  appointments  of  officers  and  employees  shall  be  entered  on  the 
Journal  of  the  Convention,  with  the  date  of  appointment. 

Rule  GO.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  stenographer  of  the  Con- 
vention to  be  present  at  every  session  of  the  Convention.  He  shall 
take  stenographic  notes  of  the  debates  in  the  Convention  and  in 
Committee  of  the  Whole  and  shall,  at  each  day's  session  of  the 
Convention,  furnish  a  copy  of  the  debates  of  the  day  before,  writ- 
ten out  in  long-hand,  and  file  the  same  with  the  Secretary,  who 
shall  keep  the  same  in  his  office,  and  the  same  shall  at  all  times  be 
open  to  the  inspection  of  delegates. 

Rule  07.  At  a  reasonable  time,  to  be  determined  bv  the  Con- 


Doc.  No.  21  18 

vention,  and  at  least  five  days  before  final  adjournment,  the  Com- 
mittee on  Revision  and  Engrossment  shall  be  instructed  to  accu- 
rately enroll  and  engross  the  present  State  Constitution,  with  all 
amendments  thereto  properly  inserted,  or  the  proposed  new  Con- 
stitution ;  and  the  same  shall  be  reported  by  said  committee  to  the 
Convention,  read  through  therein,  and  submitted  to  a  final  vote 
prior  to  its  final  adjournment.  When  an  article  of  the  Constitu- 
tion is  amended,  or  a  new  article  substituted  or  added,  such 
amended  article,  or  new  article,  shall  be  enrolled  and  engrossed 
entire  in  its  proper  place  in  the  Constitution. 

CHAPTER  XV 
Miscellaneous  Provisions 

Rule  Q8.  The  Sergeant-at-Arms  shall,  under  the  direction  of 
the  Committee  on  Printing,  receive  from  the  printer  all  matter 
printed  for  the  use  of  the  Convention,  and  keep  a  record  of  the 
time  of  the  reception  of  each  document,  and  the  number  of  copies 
received,  and  cause  a  copy  of  each  to  be  placed  on  the  desk  of  each 
member  immediately  after  their  reception  by  him.  Subject  to 
the  direction  of  the  President,  he  shall  enforce  the  rules  of  the 
Convention. 

Rule  69.  Separate  files  of  the  daily  Journal,  reports  of  the  com- 
mittees and  of  all  documents  ordered  to  be  printed  shall  be  pre- 
pared and  kept  by  the  Sergeant-at-Arms,  and  one  copy  shall  be 
placed  upon  the  desk  of  each  member  of  the  Convention  and  of  the 
Secretary. 

Rule  70.  There  shall  be  printed  as  of  course  and  without  any 
special  order  1,500  copies  of  the  journal.  500  copies  of  the 
calendar,  2,500  copies  of  each  proposed  constitutional  amendment, 
and  3,500  copies  of  each  report  and  minority  report  of  a  com- 
mittee on  the  subject  of  constitutional  revision  or  amendment  in 
which  are  set  forth  the  reasons  for  their  recommendation,  to  be 
printed  as  documents;  500  copies  of  each  other  document;  and 
3,500  copies  of  the  record  of  the  proceedings  of  the  convention. 

Rule  71.  The  printed  copies  provided  for  in  Rule  70  shall  be 
disposed  of  as  follows: 

There  shall  lie  reserved  for  binding  1,200  copies  i)\'  (lie  journal, 
1,200  copies  of  the  reports,  1,200  copies  of  tin1  record  of  the 
proceedings. 


19  Doc.  No.  21 

The  copies  so  reserved  for  binding  shall  be  folded,  collated  and 
held  by  the  printer  until  the  close  of  the  Convention,  when  they 
shall  he  bound  as  directed  by  the  President  or  the  Convention, 
and  distributed  as  follows: 

To  each  member  of  the  Convention,  two  copies. 

To  the  State  Library,  five  copies. 

To  the  Legislative  Library,  five  copies. 

To  the  office  of  each  county  clerk,  one  copy. 

To  each  public  library  of  the  State,  one  copy. 

To  each  bar  association  of  the  State,  one  copy. 

To  each  college  and  university  of  the  State,  one  copy,  and  the 
remaining  copies  shall  be  distributed  as  designated  by  the  Presi- 
dent or  the  Convention. 

The  printed  copies  provided  for  in  Pule  70  and  not  reserved 
for  binding  shall  be  disposed  of  as  follows: 

One  copy  of  each  shall  be  placed  upon  the  file  of  each  member 
of  the  Convention,  and  one  additional  copy  shall  be  delivered  or 
mailed  to  each  member  as  he  shall  direct. 

Two  copies  of  each  shall  be  placed  in  the  Legislative  Library 
for  use  of  members  of  the  Convention. 

One  hundred  copies  shall  be  reserved  for  the  use  of  the  officers 
of  the  Convention,  the  State  Library,  the  Department  of  Educa- 
tion, the  Legislative  Index  Publishing  Company,  and  the  docu- 
ment room  reserve. 

Copies  of  the  proposed  constitutional  amendments,  of  the  reports 
and  of  the  record  shall  be  mailed  daily  to  daily  newspapers  and 
Weekly  to  all  other  newspapers  and  to  each  public  library  of  the 
State,  each  bar  association  of  the  State,  each  law  school  of  the 
State,  each  college  and  university  of  the  state,  and  to  such  other 
institutions,  newspapers  and  individuals  as  shall  apply  therefor 
and  can  be  supplied  from  the  number  printed  not  necessary  for  the 
current  work  of  the  Convention. 

Two  copies  of  proposed  constitutional  amendments  and  two 
copies  of  reports  for  each  member  of  the  committees  having  duty 
in  relation  thereto  shall  be  delivered  to  the  clerks  of  such  com- 
mittees. 

The  balance  of  printed  copies  provided  for  and  not  reserved  for 
binding  shall  be  distributed  in  the  order  of  application  therefor 
by  the  members  of  the  Convention. 


Doc.  No.  21  20 

Rule  72.  The  assistant  sergeant-at-arms  and  doorkeeper  shall 
be  under  the  supervision  of  the  Sergeant-at-Arms,  who  shall  re- 
quire their  attendance  and  the  performance  of  their  duties.  The 
committee  clerks  and  stenographers  shall  be  under  the  supervision 
of  the  chairmen  of  the  several  committees  to  which  they  are  re- 
spectively assigned,  who  shall  require  their  attendance  and  the 
performance  of  their  duties.  The  general  stenographers  and  all 
assistants  to  the  stenographer  shall  be  under  the  supervision  of 
the  stenographer  of  the  Convention,  who  shall  require  their  attend- 
ance and  the  performance  of  their  duties.  With  the  exception  of 
the  Secretary  and  assistant  secretaries,  the  President's  clerk  and 
stenographer,  the  Secretary's  stenographer  and  the  secretaries  to 
the  Vice-Presidents,  all  other  officers,  assistants  and  employees  of 
the  Convention  receiving  compensation  shall  be  under  the  super- 
vision of  an  assistant  secretary  who  shall  be  designated  by  the 
Secretary  for  that  purpose  and  who  shall  require  the  attendance 
and  performance  of  duty  by  Mich  officers,  assistants  and  employees. 

To  enable  the  President  and  Secretary  of  the  Convention  to 
sign  the  necessary  vouchers  for  payment,  pursuant  to  chapter  7<> 
of  the  Laws  of  1915,  the  several  supervising  authorities  herein- 
before mentioned  shall  severally  certify  from  time  to  time  to  the 
President  and  Secretary  as  to  the  attendance  and  performance  of 
duty  by  the  officers,  assistants  and  employees  respectively  under 
their  supervision. 

Rule  73.  After  the  eleventh  day  of  dune,  nineteen  hundred  and 
fifteen,  the  call  for  proposed  constitutional  amendments  by  dis- 
tricts under  Rule  3,  shall  be  discontinued  and  no  proposed  consti- 
tutional amendment  shall  be  introduced  except  on  the  report  or 
recommendation  of  a  standing  or  select  committee. 


INDEX  — DIGEST 


(X ambers  refer  to  rules) 


A 

Absence    of    a    quorum 63 

Absentees,   roll   call   of 6 

Adjourn,  motion  to 

always    in    01  der 47 

except    one    only,    when 56 

not  amendable  or  debatable 44       ( 1 ) 

not   to   be   reconsidered 48 

precedence  of    44       ( 1 ) 

when  out  of  order 56 

Adjournment : 

final  vote  before  final 67 

to  a  day,  certain 47 

until   declared,   decorum 0 

Admission  to  the  floor 54 

Adoption  of  proposals,  majority  vote 61 

Advancement  by  unanimous  consent 38 

Allotment  of  time  in  debate 56 

Amend,  motion  to 

amendment  on  third  reading,  when   in  order 40 

certain  ones  out  of  order 44 

precedence  of   44     (12) 

Amendable,  motions  not 44    ( 1-5  ) ,  53 

Amendment : 

equivalent    not   in   order 55 

how    an'eeted    by    "  previous    question  " 53 

to  amendment,   in  order   if  germane 4!) 

to  amendment,   when   out   of   order 40 

Amendments,  proposed  constitutional.      (See  "Proposals.") 

Announcement  of  vote,  members   recorded  before 7 

Appeals  from  chair,  limit  of  debate  on 2        (2) 

Appendix  to  Journal,  points  of  order  in 14 

Appointments  of  officers  and  employees 65,  72 

Assignment   and   control   of   employees 72 

Attendance  of  members. 

call   to   secure <>2 

how    enforced     61,  62 

Audit  of  expenditures  by  committee 10 

B 
"  Bar  "   of  convention, 

definition    of     6 

members    brought    before 64 

when  in  order  to  close 63 


Doc.  No.  21  22 

(Numbers  refer  to  rides) 

Binding  of  journals,  documents,  etc 71 

Blanks: 

how  filled,  precedence 60 

may   be   filled  on  third  reading 40 

Brackets,   use   of,   in   printing   proposals 31 

Breach  of  privilege,  penalty,  etc 64 

Business,  order   of 3 

C 

Calendar   of   General   Orders 20-23 

matters  placed   upon 20 

order  of  consideration  of 21,  22 

printing  of    65 

Secretary    to    prepare 20 

to   be   placed  on   files   daily 23 

Call  of  the  Convention: 

how  made    62 

procedure    under     62,  63 

purpose    of     61,  62 

when  not  in  order 62 

Call   to   order,   of   member 12 

Chairman  of  Committee  of  the  Whole: 

to  be  designated  by  President 1        ( 5 ) 

to   report   when   no   quorum    present 28 

to   report   progress,   etc.,   when 20 

Censure  of  members   for  absence 61 

Certification   of   service   of   employees 72 

Close  "  bar  "  of  convention  when  in  order  to 63 

Close  debate,  motion  to.     (See  "  Previous  Question.") 

Committee  of  the  Whole : 

amendments  made  in,  to  be  reported 27 

any  matter  may  be  committed  to 25 

calendar  to  be  followed  in 21-27 

chairman  to  be  designated  by  President 2       (5) 

consideration  in,  before  third  reading 34 

debate  allowable   in 25 

files,  calendars  to  be  placed  on 23 

leave  to   sit   again 29 

matters  for,  all  "  General  Orders  " 20 

may  designate  its  chairman 2       (5) 

motion  on   report   of,   debatable S3 

motion  to  commit  to,  precedence  of 44       (9) 

motion  to  go  into,  precedence  of 44       (8) 

motion  "  to  rise  and   report  " 26 

motion  "  to  rise  and  report  progress  '* 29 

order  of  business,    precedence    of 3     ( 10) 

order  of  procedure    in    21.  27 

previous  question  nut  <>f  order  in 25 

procedure  in.   order  of 21.  27 

proposals,  how    taken   up 21,  27 


23                                Doc.  No.  21 

(Numbers  refer  to  rules) 

Committee  of  the  Wliole  —  Continued: 

proposals  not  moved  lose  day's  precedence 21 

proposals  to  be  considered   in,  before  3d  reading 34 

proposals  to  be  read  through  in.  when 27 

proposals,  when  referred  to 32 

quorum,  procedure   in   absence  of 28 

report  of,   motion  on,  debatable 33 

rules  of   procedure    in,  general 2.5-29 

special  days  for  going  into 22 

special  orders  in,  how  made 24 

unfinished   business    in 3  (S) ,  29 

when  convention  shall  go  into 3  (10) ,  21 

"  yeas  "   and  "  nays  "  not  taken   in 25 

Committees,  standing,  duties  of,  etc 15-19,  50.  51,  52,  56 

adverse    report    of It),  32 

agreement  to   reports  of 32 

chairman    to    sign    reports 5 

consideration,  discharge   from 25 

consideration    of    matters    in 16 

contingent  expenses,  on.  duties  of 19,  52 

convention  may  order  to  report 56 

discharge   of,  from   consideration 25 

favorable  report  of,  procedure  on 16,  32 

introduction  of  proposals  by 30    (2) ,  73 

list   of    15 

majority  report,  chairman    to    sign 5 

minority   report,   members   making,   to   sign 5,  16 

motion  to  commit  to,  precedence  of 44     (  10 ) 

printing,  on,   duties  of IS 

proposals,  all  on  one  subject  rejected,  when 32 

proposals    introduced    by 39  ( 2 ) .  73 

recommit  to,  motion  to,  on   3d   reading 41 

report,  convention  may   order  to 5(i 

report  in  three  days,  when   to 50        ( 2 

report,  majority    required    to 1(5 

report  of    rules    committee 24,  56 

reports,  adverse   or   favorable 16 

reports,  majority,  to  be  signed  by  chairman 5 

reports,  minority,  to  be  signed  by  members 5 

reports  of,  order  of,  business  precedence 3       (5) 

reports  of,  to   contain    statement 5 

revis  ion  and  engrossment,  on,  duties  of 17 

rules,    duties   of,    on 56 

rules,   special   order   on    report   of 24 

to  (  onsider  and  report  promptly 16 

Committees,   select,  reports  of,   order 3       ( 6 ) 

Communications,    presentation    of 3    (1.2),  5 

Consideration : 

by  committee  of  the  whole  before  3rd  reading 34 

discharge  of  committee   from 25 


Doc.  No.  21  21 

(X umbers  refer  to  rules) 

Consideration  —  Continued: 

of  amendments,   order   of 53 

of  matters    in    committees 16 

of  report  of  rules  committee 56 

Constitution,  proposed  amendment  to.      (See  "Proposals.") 

Contempt,   definition   and   procedure 63 

Contingent  expenses,  committee  on: 

duties    of    19 

to   audit    expenditures 51,  52 

Control  of  employees 72 

Convention : 

call  of,  motion    for,    precedence 44       (3) 

call  of,  out  of  order,  when 62 

call  of,  procedure,    etc 61,  62 

corporation  employees  excluded  from  floor 54 

employees  of,   entered    in   Journal 65 

expenses  of,  audit  of.  by  committee 19 

may  order  committee  to  report 56 

officers  to  be  entered  on   Journal 65 

privilege  of  the   floor  of 54,  64 

quorum  of,  majority  to  constitute 61 

removal  of  officers  and  employees 72 

sessions  of,  open   to   public 54 

when  in  possession  of  motion 46 

when  go  into  committee  of  the  whole 21 

Convention  chamber: 

admissions  to    54 

Bar  of  Convention   to  constitute 6 

privileges   of   convention 54,  64 

Conversation,   prohibited   during  debate 8 

Corporations,   employees   of,   excluded    from    floor 54 

D 

Debatable,  motions  and  questions: 

to  adjourn  to  time  certain 47 

to  amend,  except  on   main   question 44     (12) 

to  commit  to  a  committee,  except  on  main  question 44  (  10,11) 

to  commit     to     committee     of     the     whole,     except     on     main 

question     44       ( 9 ) 

to  go  into  committee  of  the  whole,  except  on  main  question..  .  44       (8) 

on  main  question  if  "  previous  question  "  negatived 53 

to  postpone    indefinitely    44        (6) 

to  postpone  to  day  certain,  except  on  main  question 44        (7) 

on  questions  in  committee  of  the  whole,  except 25.  26,  27 

on  report  of  committee  of  the  whole 33 

on  report  of  committee  on  revision  and  engrossing 59 

on  report  of  committee    on    rules 56 

on  third  reading  of  proposals,  when 39 

on  third   reading  of  proposals,  when  not 37 


25                                  Doc.  Xo.  21 

(Numbers  refer  to  rules) 
Debatable,  motions  and  questions  not : 

ad  journ   for  the   day,  to 44  ( 1 ) ,  48 

amendments  after  expiration  of  time-limit    (in  C.  of  \V.)  ....  27 

breach  of  privilege,  on  decision  of 64 

call  of  the  convention,  for  a 44       ( 3 ) 

lay  on   the   table,  to 44   ^    ( 5 ) 

main  question,  after  adoption  "  previous  question  " 53 

main  question,  when  certain  other  motions  made 44  I  7-12) 

postpone  special  order,  to 13 

"  previous  question,"  when  moved 53 

priority,  questions  of.  in  same  order 13 

proposals,  after  completion  third  reading 37 

proposals,  after  roll-call  on  passage  begun 37 

recess,    to    take    a 44  ( 2 ) ,  47 

recommit  on  third  reading,  to 41 

request  to  be  excused   from  voting,  decision  of 7 

'•  rise  and  report  progress,"  to    (in  C.  of  W.) 26 

suspend  any  rule,  to 13 

Debate,    order    of 11-14 

allotment  of  time  in 56 

appeals,   members  to   speak   once   only 2        ( 2  ) 

decorum  and  order  during 8 

five-minute  rule,  application  of 39,  56,  59 

no  member  to  speak  more  than  once,  etc.,  when. 2  (2) .  11.  39,  56,  59 

report  of  rules  committee  to  limit 56 

resolutions  giving  rise  to.  to  lie  over 50 

to  be  reported  by  official  stenographer 66 

(See   also   "Debatable"    and   "  Debatable,    not,"   above) 

Debates :    stenographic   record   of 66 

Decorum  and  order 2  ( 1 ) ,  S,  9,  10,  12.  63.  6S 

Delivery  of  printed  matter  to  convention 6S 

Dilatory  motions,  when  out  of  order 56 

Disbursements   of   convention   appropriation 19 

Discharge   of    committee 25 

Distribution  of  printed  journals,  documents,  etc 71 

Divisible  motions,  and  indivisible 55 

Division  to  be  determined  by  yeas  and  nays,  when 57 

Division  of  time  in  debate , 56 

Documents,  etc. : 

delivery  of  to  convention 68 

distribution   of    71 

files  of  to  be  placed  on  desks 22,  68,  69 

number  of,  to  be  printed 7'» 

printing  of IS,  32,  51.  6.").  liii.  <>s.  69,  70 

Duties  of  president  and  officers,  members,  employees,  etc.      ("~'ee  re- 
spective titles:      '•President,"   etc.) 

B 

Employees : 

assignment  of.  to  respective  duties 72 


Doc.  lSTo.  21  26 

(X umbers  refer  to  rules) 

Employees  —  Continued : 

names  to   be  entered  on   journal 65 

removal  of   72 

service  of,  to  be  certified 72 

Endorsement  of  papers,  how  made 5 

Enforcement  of: 

attendance   of   members 61.  62 

decorum  and  order 2   (1),  S-10,  12,  63,  68 

rules   by    sergeant-at-arms 68 

Engrossment : 

of  entire  article   amended,  or 67 

of  entire  proposed  new  constitution 67 

of  proposals    17.  35 

report  of  before  3d   reading 35 

Equivalent  motions  out  of  order 55 

Excuse : 

for  absence  of  member 61 

from  voting,  request  for 7 

Expenditures : 

audit  of,  by  committee  on  contingent  expenditures lit 

resolutions  involving,  reference  and  report  of 52 

Expenses,   contingent,   committee   on,   duties.      (See    "Contingent," 
etc.) 

Expiration  of  time  limit  in  committee  of  the  whole,  procedure  on.  .  27 

Explanation  of  reasons  for  excuse  from  voting 7 

Extra  printing,  resolutions  for,   reference,  etc 51 

F 

Files  of  journals,  documents,  etc 32.  68,  69 

Filling  blanks,  order  of  consideration  in 40.  60 

Final  passage  of  proposals: 

consideration   by  committee  of   the   whole,  before 34 

debate  in  order,  when 39 

debate  out  of  order,  when 37 

engrossment  of  proposals  before 17,  35,  67 

final  form  of  proposals  on 67 

final  vote  before  final  adjournment 67 

••  yeas  "   and   "  nays  "   to   be   entered    in    journal 37 

(See  also  "Proposals"  and  "Third  Reading.**) 

First  reading  of  proposals  by  title 32 

Five-minute  rule,  when  applicable 39,  56,  59 

Fix  time  to  which  to  adjourn,  debatable 47 

Floor,  admissions  to 54 

(' 

"  General  Orders,"  definition  of 20 

rules  of  procedure,  etc 20  -29,  34 

(For  details  of  rules  and  procedure,   see  "Committee  of  the 
Whole.") 

Germane,   amendment  to   amendment   allow  aide 49 


27  Doc.  No.  21 

( Numbers  refer  to  rules) 
1 

Index   of    proposals 42 

Indivisible  questions    55 

Information,  resolutions  requesting,  reference,  etc 50 

Introduction  of  proposals 30,  31,  32,  43,  73 

by  members    30    ( 1 ) ,  31,  32,  43 

by  committee   30   (2) .  31,  32,  73 

by  members,  prohibited  after  June  11 73 

Italics,  new  matter  to  be  printed  in 31 

J 
Journal  of  the  Convention : 

copies,    distribution    of 71 

copies,    1,500  to.  be   printed 70 

daily  proceedings  to  be  kept  in 65 

tiles  of,  to  be  provided  for  members 05,  09 

members,  when  names  of  entered  in 37,  43.  57 

officers  and  employees,  names  of ,  in 65 

proposals  to  be  entered   in 43 

questions  of  order  to  be  entered  in 14 

reading  and   approval   of 3 

"  yeas  "  and  "  nays  "  to  be  entered  in 37,  57 

L 

Lay  on  the  table,  motion  to 44  ( 5 ) ,  48 

Leave  to  sit  again    (committee  of  the  whole) 29 

Limit  of  debate: 

by  previous  question 53 

by  report  of  rules  committee 56 

five-minute   rule  applicable,   when 39,   56,  59 

on  report  of  revision  and  engrossing 59 

on  third  reading 39,  53 

none  in  committee  of  the  whole 25 

(See  also  "Debatable"  and  '•Debatable,  not.") 

Limit  of  time  in  committee  of  the  whole,  expiration  of 27 

M 

Main  question: 

definition  of   53 

when  debate  on,  out  of  order 44,  53 

Majority  of  members  elected: 

necessary  to   adopt  proposals 61 

to   constitute   a   quorum 61 

two-thirds  vote  to  make  special  order 24,  37 

Matters  in  committee  of  the  whole,  how  moved 21 

Members  of  Convention: 

absence  of,  censure,   penalty,  excuse,  etc 61 

attendance  of,  how  enforced 62 

calendar  to  be  furnished  daily 23 

contempt,  when   in 63 


2 

(1) 

s 

30 

(1) 

12 

Doc.  Xo.  21  28 

{Numbers  refer  to  rules) 

Members  of  Convention  —  Continued: 

fifteen   may   require   roll    call 

in  debate,  confined  to  question  under  discussion 

in  place  during  vote 

introduction    of    proposals   by 

may  be  called  to  order,  when 

may  call  another  member  to  order 12 

may  record  vote  before  result   declared 7 

may  request  motion  to  be  read 4.5 

names  of,  entered  in  journal,  when 37,  43.  57 

not  to  converse   during  debate S 

not  to  introduce  proposals  after  June   11 73 

not  to  pass  between  speaker  and  chair S 

present  shall  vote  unless  excused •. G.  63 

privileges  of,  when  suspended 03 

request  of,  to  be  excused  from  voting 7 

rights  and  duties 4-7 

shall    endorse    papers 5 

speaking  in  committee  of  the  whole,  no  limit 25 

speaking  on  appeals,    once    only 2       (2) 

speaking  on  report  of  rule   committee    50 

speaking  on  report  of  revision  committee    50 

speaking  on  third    reading     30 

to  be  recognized  by  chair  before  speaking S 

to  remain  in  place  until  adjournment  declared 0 

twenty-five  may  postpone  rules  report 56 

Memorials,  etc.,  presentation  of 3    ( 1) ,  4,  5 

Minority  reports  of  committees: 

to  be  printed 32 

to  be  signed  by  members  making  same 5 

Motions: 

adjourn    44    ( 1 ) ,  48 

adjourn  to  day  certain 47 

adjourn,  when  out  of  order 56 

amend,    to     44     (12) 

amend  an  amendment,  when  out  of  order 40 

amendable  motions   44 

amendable,    motions    not 4t 

call  of  convention,  for,  not  debatable  or  amendable 44        (3) 

certain,  always  in  order 47 

commit  to  committee  of  the  whole 44       (9) 

commit  to  a  committee 44  (10-11) 

debatable    motions 25,    33,    44.  47.  53.  50,  50 

debatable,  motions  not 7,  13,  20,  41,  44 

dilatory,  when   out   of  order 56 

discharge  committee,  to '. 25 

division  of,  when ^>~> 

during  consideration  of  rides  report 50 

equivalent,   out   of   order ^>:-> 

go  into  committee  of  the  whole 41       (S) 


29  Doc.  No.  21 

(X umbers  refer  to  rules) 
Motions  —  Continued: 

in  committee  of  the  whole 21,  26 

lay  on  the  table  not  debatable  or  amendable 44        (5) 

'•  leave  to  sit  again,"  for,    ( C.  of  W. ) 29 

main  question,  when  debate  precluded 44(7-12) 

members  may   require,  to  be  read 45 

order  of  business,  precedence  in 3       (3) 

postpone  indefinitely,  debatable,  not  amendable 44       (6) 

postpone,    precedence    of 44 

precedence    of    44-49 

previous   question    44,  (4) ,  53 

previous  question  negatived,  effect 53 

priority,  questions  of,  when  not   debatable 13 

recess,  to  take,  precedence  of 44       (2) 

recommit  on  third  reading,  not  debatable 41 

reconsidered,  which  can  or  cannot  be 4S 

reduced   to    writing,   when 45 

"  rise  and  report  progress,"'  to   (C.  of  W.) 26,  29 

"  strike  out   and   insert,"   indivisible 55 

take  from   the  table,   not  reconsidered 4S 

shall  be  stated  before  debate  or  vote 45 

special    order,    to    make 24 

suspension  of  a  rule 13 

when  in  possession  of  house 46 

withdrawal    of.   when    allowable 46 

N 

Names  of  members  entered  in  Journal 37,  43,  57 

New  matter  in   proposals,  printed   in   italics 31 

"  No  quorum  " : 

in  committee  of  the  whole,  procedure 2S 

in    convention,    procedure 63 

Non-debatable  questions.      (See  •■Debatable,  not.'") 

Notices,  order  of  business  of,  precedence 3        I  3) 

Number  of: 

copies  of  documents,  etc..  to  he  printed 70 

members  on  standing  committees 15 

members  to  postpone  rules  report 56 

members  to  require  '*  yeas  "  and  "  nays  " 57 

times  member  may  speak  on  certain  motions.  2   (2),  11,  39.  50,  50 

times  member  may  speak,  under  special  rule 56 

Numbers,  order  of  consideration  in  filling  blanks 60 

0 

Objection  to  consideration  of  rules  report 56 

Officers  and  employees: 

duties  of   1,   10.  72 

names  of.  entered  in  Journal 65 

removal  of    72 

service  of,  to  be  certified  before  paid 72 


Doc.  Xo.  21  30 

(Numbers  refer  to  rules) 

Order  and  decorum 2   ( 1 ) ,  8-10.  12,  63,  68 

call  to,  how  and  when 12 

during   debate    S 

points  of,  entered  in  Journal 14 

president   to    preserve 2       ( 1 ) 

sergeant-at-arms   to   enforce   rules 6S 

Order  of  business '. 3 

motions  affecting,  referred  to  rules  committee 56 

special  orders,  how  made 24 

Order   of   debate 11-14 

Order  of  third  reading,  precedence 3       (  7 ) 

(See  also  "Third  reading  of  proposals.'') 

Orders,  general  and  special 20-24 

(See  ''Committee  of  the  Whole.") 

P 

Papers,  etc.,  presentation  and  disposition  of 4 

endorsement  of   by   members 5 

Passage  of  proposals,  final.      (See  "Third  reading.") 

Penalty  for  absence  of  members 61 

Personal  reflections  ovit  of  order 2        (1) 

Persons  entitled  to  privileges  of  floor 54 

Petitions,  etc..  presentation  and  disposition  of 4 

endorsement  by  members 5 

Points  of  order  to  be  entered  in  Journal 14 

Postpone,  to: 

precedence    of   motions 44    ( 6-7 ) 

vote  required,  report  of  rules  committee 56 

Precedence  of: 

amendments  under  previous  question 53 

general  orders  in  committee  of  the  whole 21 

motions  generally    13,  44-40,     53 

President : 

announce  twice  request  for  unanimous  consent 38 

appeals,  decision  of,  may  assign  reasons  on 2        (2) 

appoint  committees,  unless,  etc 2    ( 3 ) , 

call  members  to  order,  when  shall S. 

duties  of 1,  2,  S,   12,  15,  68. 

certify  passages  of  proposals,  shall 

chairman  of  rules  committee,  shall  be 

confine  members  to  question  under  discussion,  shall 

consulting  member  of  committees,  shall  be 

decide  questions  and  points  of  order,  shall 

designate   member    to    preside,    when    shall 

designate    reporters,    may 

direct  serjeant-at-arms  enforcing  rules,  may OS 

execute  judgment  of  convention,  shall 64 

members  to  address,   before   speaking S 

name  chairman  of  committee  of  the  whole,  shall 2       (5) 

name  member  entitled  to  floor,  shall 2       (1) 


15 

12 

o 

(6) 

2 

(9) 

2 

(1) 

2 

(10) 

2 

(2) 

2 

(4) 

2 

(7) 

3  J                                Doc.  No.  '21 

(Numbers  refer  to   rules) 
President  —  Continued : 

preserve  order  and  decorum,  shall 2    (1,  S),  12,  64,  68 

prevent  personal  reflections,  shall 2        ( 1 ) 

privilege  of  floor,  may  grant  or  revoke 54 

remove  officers  and  employees,  may 72 

state  question  before  debate  or  vote,  shall 45 

suppress  disorder,  shall 2       ( 8 ) 

vote,  not  required  to  in  ordinary  proceeding,  except 2       (8) 

tie  vote,  including  vote  of,  question  lost 2    (8  ) ,  58 

vice-president  to  preside  in  absence  of 2     (10) 

Previous  question ;   motion  for 53 

in  order  of  third  reading 39 

cannot  be  reconsidered 4S 

not  amendable  or  debatable 44    (4) ,  53 

not  applicable  in  committee  of  the  whole 25 

order  of  precedence 44       ( 4 ) 

order  of  considering  amendments   under 53 

when  out  of  order 56 

Printed  journals,  documents,  etc 68-71 

delivery  of    6S 

distribution   of    71 

files  of  to  be  kept 60 

number  of  copies  of 70 

Printing  of: 

calendars,   supervised   by   secretary 65 

documents 68,  70 

journals 65,  70 

minority  reports  of  committees 32 

proposals 18,  32,  35,  70 

proposals,  before  third  reading 35 

resolutions  for,  to  be  referred 51 

Printing,  committee  on,  duties  of IS,  51 

Priority  of  motions,  when  question  of,  not  debatable 13 

Privileges    and    elections,    committee    on,    to    consider    breach    of 

privilege,  contempt,  etc 63 

Privileges: 

of  the  floor    2    ( 7 ) ,  54,  64 

of  the  floor,  breach  of 64 

of  membership,   when   suspended 63 

Proceedings  of  convention,  stenographic  record  of 66 

Progress,  "  leave  to  report  and  sit  again  " 20 

Progress  of  proposals,  entered  in  register 42 

Proposals,  relative  to,  general  rules 30-43,  73 

action  on  in  committee  of  the  whole 20-20,  32-34 

advancement  by  unanimous  consent 38 

by  committee  only,  after  June   11 73 

consideration  in  committee  of  the  whole 26,  27,  34 

debate  allowable  on  third  reading,  when 30 

distribution  of.  when  printed 71 

endorsement  of  by  members 5 


Doc.  No.  21  32 

(X umbers  refer  to   rules) 
Proposals,  relative  to,  general  rules  —  Continued: 

engrossment  of,  before  third  reading 17,  35,  67 

final   form  of,  before  passage 67 

final  passage  of 3   ( 7) ,  34,  35,  36,  37,  39,  40,  41,  61,  67 

first  and  second  reading  by  title 32 

how  prepared,  form  of 30-31 

in  general  orders   21 

introduction  of   3   (4) ,  30,  32,  72 

majority  vote  of  members  elected,  to  pass 61 

may  be  tabled  on  third  reading 37 

new  matter  to  be  italicized 31 

not  to  be  passed  on  day  considered  in  committee  of  the  whole  36 

number  of  copies  to  be  printed 70 

old  matter  omitted  to  be  bracketed 31 

order  of  third  reading  of 3       (7) 

previous  question,  effect  of  on  third  reading 30 

printed  before  third  reading,  to  be 35 

progress  of,  to  be  entered  in  register 42 

register  of,  to  be  kept  by  secretary 42 

rejected  by   adverse   report,   when 32 

revision  of  before  passage 17,  35,  67 

report  by  committee  of  whole,  debatable 33 

third  reading  of.      (See  "Third  reading.")  ...3   (7),  34,  35,  36,  37 

30,  40,  41,  61,  67 

titles  to  be  printed  in  calendar 20 

titles  to  state  subject  matter 31 

to  lie  introduced  in  duplicate 31 

to  be  read  in  order  of  third  reading  numbers 37 

to  be  read  in  committee  of  the  whole,  section  by  section 27 

to  receive  three  readings  before  passage 36 

vote  shall  follow  third  reading  immediately 37 

when  referred  to  committee  of  the  whole 32 

"  yeas  "  and  "  nays  "  on  final  passage 37 

Proposed  amendments  to  constitution.      (See  "Proposals.'') 

Public,  all  sessions  to  be  open  to 54 

Purging  members  of  contempt 63 

Putting  question,  members  not  to  speak  or  leave 8 

Q 

Question: 

amendment  to,  when  out  of  order 44.  40 

being  put,  no  member  to  speak  or  leave 8 

division  of    55 

lost  on  tie  vote,   including  President's 58 

main,  definition  of    53 

of  priority,  when  noi   debatable 13 

on    filling  blanks,   order 60 

on  final  passage  to  follow  third   reading 37 

previous,  how  put   53 


33  Doc.  No.  21 

(Numbers  refer  to  rides) 

Question  —  Continued : 

previous,   motion  for,   precedence 44       (4) 

reconsideration    of    48 

member  may  be  recorded  on,  before  result  declared 7 

request  to  be  excused  from  voting  on 7 

same  not  to  be  reconsidered  twice 4S 

to  be  stated  before  being  put 43 

when  cannot  be  reconsidered 4S 

( See  also   "  Previous  question,"  "Amendable,   and  not,''   "  De- 
batable, and  not,"  "Third  reading."  etc.) 

Quorum : 

absence  of,  in  convention,  procedure 63 

absence  of,  in  committee  of  the  whole,  procedure 2S 

majority  of  members  elected  to  constitute 61 

R 

Reading  of  Journal    3 

Reading,  third.      (See  "Third  reading.") 

Readings,  each  proposal  to  have  three 32,  36 

Recess,  motion  for,  precedence  of 44 

Recognition  of  member  precedent  to  speaking 8 

Recommit,  motion  to  on  third  reading  not  debatable 41 

Reconsider,  motion  to    48 

Reconsideration  of  certain  motions  out  of  order 4S 

Record  of  proceedings: 

stenographer   to   take    66 

to  be  printed  and  placed  on  files 60,  70 

to  be  public   66 

Recording  vote  of  member  before  result  declared 7 

Reference : 

of   proposals    32 

of  action  touching  rules,  etc 56 

to  committee  of  the  whole 2-5 

of   resolutions    50,   51,  52 

of  resolutions  calling  for  information 50       (2) 

of  resolutions  contemplating   expenditures 52 

of  resolutions  for  printing 51 

Refusal  to  vote  a  "  contempt  " 63 

Register  of  proposals  to  be  kept 42 

Rejection  of  matter  co-related  to  proposals  defeated 32 

Remonstrances : 

to  be  endorsed  by  member 5 

to  be  read  by  title  and  referred 4 

Removal  of  officers  and  employees 72 

Report  of  committee  of  the  whole: 

debate  allowable  on 33 

how  made 27-20 

when  with  amendments    27 


Doc.  Xo.  21  34 

(X umbers  refer  to  rules) 

Report  of  committee  on  contingent  expenses in,  52 

Report  of  committee  on   printing IS,  51 

Report  of  committee  on   revision   and   engrossment 17,  35,  67 

Report  of  committee  on  rules 24,  56 

Reports  of  standing  committees.      (See  '•Committees.*') 
Reporters : 

appointment,  privileges  and  seats 2       (7) 

not  to  appear  before  committees 2       ( 7 ) 

Requests  to  be  excused  from  voting,  decision  of,  etc 7,  61 

Resolutions: 

calling  for   information,   reference oil       (  2  i 

contemplating  expenditures,  reference 52 

equivalent,  not  in  order 55 

for  printing  extra  documents,  reference IS,  51 

giving  rise  to  debate,  lie  over 50 

laid  over,  when  may  be  called  up 50       ( 1 ) 

order  of  business  of,  precedence 3       (3) 

Revision  and  engrossment,  committee  on: 

duties   of    17 

procedure  on  report  of    59 

report  of  always  in  order 3 

report  of  required  before  third  reading 35 

to  examine  and  revise  proposals 17 

to  report  same  revised  and  engrossed 17,  35 

to  report  in  final  form,  proposed  new  constitution 67 

"  Rise  and  report  "  motion  to,  when  out  of  order.      (C.  W.) 26 

"Rise  and  report  progress,"  motion  to.      (C.  W.)  :. 

always  in  order    26 

not   debatable    26 

Roll  call: 

after  commenced,  no  other  business  in  order 37 

by  districts  for  introduction 3       (4) 

of  absentees  called  once 6 

to  follow  third  reading  of  proposals 32 

"  yeas  *'  and   "  nays  "  entered   in  .Journal 37 

Rules,  committee  on : 

may  sit  during  session 56 

may  report  at  any  time 56 

may  report  rule  limiting  debate 56 

powers  and  jurisdiction   24.  56 

report  of,  may  be  postponed  by  25  members 56 

special  order  on  report  of 24 

Rules: 

enforcement  of   2   ( 1  1 ,   (8),  68 

suspension  of   56 

Rules,  standing,  of  convention: 

committees  and  their  duties.     Chap.   VI 15-10 

committee   of   the  whole,     ('ha)).   VI II 25-29 

Convention  chamber  and  privileges.     Chap.   XIII 54 

general  and  special  orders.     Chap.  VII 20  24 


35  Doc.  No.  -21 

(  X umbers  refer  to  rules) 
Rules,  standing,  of  convention  —  Continued: 

general  rules.     Chap.  XIV 55-67 

miscellaneous  provisions.     Chap.    XV 68-73 

motions  and  their  precedence,     (hap.  X 44-40 

order  and  decorum.     (  hap.   IV 8-10 

order  of  business.     Chap.  II 3 

order  of  debate.     Chap.  V 1 1-14 

powers  and  duties  of  president.     Chap.  1 1,     2 

previous  question.     Chap.   XII 53 

proposed  amendments.     Chap.    IX 30-43 

resolutions.     Chap.   XI 50-52 

rights  and  duties  of  members.     Chap.   Ill 4-7 


Second  reading  of  proposals 32 

Secretary,  duties  of 21,  42,  45,  63.  65,  66,  72 

Secretary's: 

desk   and   rooms,   use   of 10 

no  member  to  visit  desk  during  roll-call 10 

Sergeant-at-arms,   duties  of 23,   63,   68,  6!) 

Sessions : 

admissions   to   floor    during 54 

open  to  the  public 54 

Special  days  for  General  Orders 22 

Special  Orders: 

by  acceptance  of  report  of  rules  committee 24,  56 

by  two-thirds  vote    24 

by  unanimous  consent   24 

Speaking: 

in   committee  of  the  whole,  unrestricted 25 

limitations  upon  third  reading 30 

not  more  than  five  minutes,  when 30,  56,  50 

not  more  than  once  or  twice,  when 2   (2),  11,  30,  56,  50 

three  minutes  on  request  to  be  excused 7 

to    explain    vote 7 

to  commence  only  after  recognition 8 

transgression  of   rules   in 12 

(See  also  "  Debatable  "  and  "  Debatable  not.") 
Statement : 

of  motion  before  debate  or  vote.  .  .  .' 45 

of  member  asking  to  be  excused,  etc 7 

of  request  for  unanimous  consent 38 

of  subjects  of  proposals  in  titles 31 

Stenographer,   duties   of 66 

"  Strike  out  and  insert,"  motion  to,  indivisible 55 

Subjects  of  proposals  to  he  stated  in  titles 31 

Sums,   in  tilling  blanks,  order  of  consideration 60 

Supervision  of  employees 72 

Suspend   rules,  motion   to,  application   of 56 


Doc.  No.  21  3G 

(X umbers   refer  to   rules) 
T 

Table: 

motion  to  lay  on.  precedence   of    44       (5) 

motion  to  lay  on,  cannot  reconsider   4S 

motion  to  take   from,   cannot   reconsider 4S 

Third  reading  of  proposals: 

amendment  not  in  order  on,  except 40 

blanks  may  be  filled  on 40 

debate  on,  one  hour  after  reading  title 39 

engrossment    before 17,    35,  67 

five-minute   rule,  application   of 30 

in  order  one  day  after  report  by  committee  of  the  whole 36 

in  order  to   recommit  on 41 

majority  vote  of  members  elected  to   pass 61 

must  be  considered  in  committee  of  the  whole  before 34 

must   he  printed    before     " 35 

must  lie  reported  revised  and  engrossed 35 

order   of   business   of,   precedence 3       (7) 

recommit,  motion  to  not  debatable 41 

roll  call  to  follow  immediately  the 37 

two-thirds   vote   may    change   order 37 

"  yeas  "  and  "  nays  "  entered  in  Journal 37 

Tie  vote,  including  President's,  question  lost 58 

Time,  allotment  of  in  debate  under  special  rule 56 

Time  limit,  in  committee  of  the  whole,  expiration  of 27 

Time  member  may  speak,  under  special  rule,  etc.. 2  (2).  11,  39,  56,  59 
Titles  of  proposals: 

to  appear  in  calendar 20 

to  be  read  on  first  and  second  reading 32 

to  state   subject   matter 31 

Two-thirds  vote  required: 

to  change  regular  order  on  third  reading 37 

to  make  a  special  order,  if  objected  to 24 

U 

Unanimous  consent : 

to  amend    on    third    reading 40 

to  make  a  special  order 24 

to  prevent  member  to  speak  more  than  twice 11 

request  for,  to  advance  out  of  order,  etc 38 

to   third    reading   before   engrossment 35 

Unfinished  business  in  general  orders,  precedence 3       (S) 

Unfinished  business  in  committee  of  the  whole,  procedure 29 

V 

Vice-Presidents : 

consulting  members  of  committees 2     (10) 

duties  of    l.     2     (10) 

member  to  preside  in  absence  of  President  and  both  V.  Ps....  2       (4) 


37  Doc.  No.  21 

(Numbers  refer  to  rules) 

Vote: 

may  be  recorded  before  announcement 7 

tie,  including  President's,  question  lost 58 

two-thirds,  when  required 24,  37 

"  yeas  "  and  "  nays  "  in  Journal,  when 37,  57 

Voting : 

by  members  present  compulsory,  but 6 

members  may  be  excused  from 7 

Vouchers  for  expenditures,  audit  of 19 

W 

Withdrawal  of  motions,  when  allowed 46 

Writing,  motions  to  be  reduced  to,  except 45 

Y 

"  Yeas  "  and  "  Nays  " : 

may  be  required  by  fifteen  members 57 

no  member  to  visit  secretary's  desk  during 10 

not  to  be  taken  in  committee  of  the  whole 25 

on  final  passage    37,  57 

to  be  entered  in  Journal 37,  57 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  22 


REPORT  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  LEGISLATIVE 
POWERS,  RELATIVE  TO  PROPOSED  AMENDMENT 
No.  751  (INT.  573) 


July  21,  1915 

In  advocating  the  adoption  of  the  bill  introduced  by  Mr.  Dun- 
more,  Int.  Xo.  573,  the  Committee  on  Legislative  Powers  and 
Limitations  desires  to  file  with  the  Convention  the  following 
memorandum : 

This  bill  proposes  to  write  into  the  basic  law  of  the  State  the 
principle  of  reasonableness  in  legislation  in  the  exercise  of  the 
police  power  which  is  a  part  of  the  unwritten  constitutional  law 
of  this  state. 

In  the  case  of  the  People  vs.  Ringe,  197  N.  Y.,  the  Court  of 
Appeals  held  unanimously  as  follows : 

"  Power  and  authority  exist  *  *  *  in  the  Legislature 
to  license  and  regulate  certain  vocations,  notwithstanding  the 
provisions  of  the  Federal  and  State  Constitutions,  but  such 
power  and  authority  are  dependent  upon  a  reasonable  neces- 
sity for  its  exercise  to  protect  health,  morals,  or  the  general 
welfare  of  the  State." 

This  principle  was  fully  discussed  in  the  prevailing  and  dissent- 
ing opinion  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  in  the 


Doc.  No.  22  2 

Slaughter  House  Cases  as  early  as  1872,  and  although  the  court 
divided  in  respect  to  monopoly  and  special  privilege,  there  was 
general  agreement  to  the  effect  that  the  States  have  reserve  power 
to  enact  police  laws  in  all  cases  where  it  is  necessary  to  protect 
the  genera]  interests  of  the  community. 

Inasmuch  as  citizens  generally  have  failed  to  understand  the 
distinction  between  the  written  and  the  actual  construction  and 
application  of  the  Constitution  and  the  recognition  by  the  courts 
of  this  power  of  the  State,  it  has  seemed  to  this  committee  that 
it  is  of  great  importance  in  so  fundamental  a  matter  that  the 
written  Constitution  should  clearly  express  the  precise  status  of 
the  law  and  leave  no  question  for  discussion  or  misunderstanding 
as  to  the  power  of  the  limitations  of  the  Legislature  or  of  the  courts. 

The  provision  to  the  effect  that  the  Legislature  shall  not  pass  a 
bill  under  the  police  power,  etc,  unless  there  is  reasonable  neces- 
sity for  the  exercise  of  such  power  to  protect  the  general  interest 
of  the  community  which  is  the  phraseology  of  the  Federal  courts, 
or  to  protect  the  health,  morals,  or  the  general  welfare  of  the  State, 
which  is  the  phraseology  of  the  State  courts,  will  clarify  the  entire 
situation,  remove  all  doubts  and  will  be  of  particular  benefit  to 
the  community  in  all  important  respects. 

On  the  one  hand  it  will  relieve  the  Legislature  of  the  charge  of 
attempting  to  do  that  which  it  has  not  the  power  to  do,  and  on 
the  other  hand  will  relieve  the  courts  from  the  charge  of  attempt- 
ing to  deprive  the  Legislature  of  power. 

This  adopts  into  the  written  Constitution  the  principle  of  the 
■■  rule  of  reason  ",  which  has  prevailed  in  the  Federal  courts  from 
early  times  and  which  was  accentuated  a  short  time  ago  under  the 
decisions  of  the  Standard  Oil  and  Tobacco  eases. 

The  same  rule  of  reason  in  the  ('(instruction,  application  and 
determination  of  the  validity  of  a  statute  has  long  prevailed  in 
this  State  and  is  formally  written  into  the  law  in  the  Public  Utili- 
ties Ad  of  L907,  in  which  by.  Section  P>,  ii  was  bold  that  the 
orders  of  the  Public  Service  Commission  should  be  just  and  rea- 
sonable, tbns  subjecting  tbeir  review  on  the  ground  of  justice  and 
reasonableness.  This  was  also  embodied  in  the  State  Labor  Law 
of  L9O0  and  was  recognized  and  repeated  with  greater  emphasis 
;u  tin1  amendment  contained   in   the   Industrial    Law  of   11)15. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.   23 


REPORT  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  STATE  FINANCES 
AND  EXPENDITURES  ON  THE  SEVERAL  PROPOSED 
AMENDMENTS  IN  RELATION  TO  DEBTS  CON- 
TRACTED BY  THE  STATE 


July  24,  1915. 
Mr.    Stimson,    for    the    Committee    on    the    State    Finances, 
Revenues  and  Expenditures,  submits  the  following  memorandum : 

Your  Committee  has  considered  the  present  situation  of  the 
debts  of  the  State  of  jSTew  York,  the  sinking  funds  created  for 
such  debts  and  the  provisions  of  Article  Seventh  of  the  Constitu- 
tion and  of  the  statutes  governing  and  relating  to  such  debts.  It 
has  also  given  consideration  to  the  various  proposed  amendments 
relating  to  this  article  which  have  been  referred  to  it  by  the  Con- 
vention. As  a  result  of  such  investigation,  it  reports  to  the  Con- 
vention a  Proposed  Amendment  embracing  its  recommendations 
in  respect  to  Article  Seventh  of  the  Constitution. 

The  Increase  of  Indebtedness  in  ISTew  York  on  the  Part 
of  the  State  and  Its  Subdivisions 
Your  Committee  finds  that  the  net  debt  of  New  York  State  over 
and  above  all  sinking  funds  has  increased  from  $7,400,000  in  the 


Doc.  Xo.  23  2 

year  1903  to  over  $145,500,000  at  the  present  time.  The  gross 
debt  outstanding  today  is  over  $186,000,000.  The  total  authorized 
debt  today  is  over  $231,000,000.  During  this  period  the  popu- 
lation has  only  increased  from  7,650,000  in  1903  to  9,899,000  in 
1914.  The  per  capita  net  State  debt  has  thus  arisen  from  $0.94 
per  capita  in  1903  to  approximately  $15.04  at  present,  Xew 
York  has  at  present  not  merely  the  largest  total  debt,  but  by  far 
the  largest  per  capita  direct  debt  of  any  of  the  United  States. 
It  is  much  larger  than  those  of  the  large  states  which  are  its 
neighbors.  Pennsylvania  has  practically  no  debt,  its  sinking  fund 
accumulations  exceeding  its  indebtedness.  In  Illinois,  the  per 
capita  debt  is  but  $0.39;  in  Xew  Jersey,  $0.24;  in  Indiana, 
$0.49;  in  Michigan,  $2.41,  the  foregoing  figures  being  for  1913. 
Correspondingly  there  has  been  recently  shown  in  Xew  York 
a  tendency  on  the  part  of  the  political  subdivisions  of  the  State 
to  greatly  increase  their  indebtedness.  The  United  States  Census 
Bureau  Bulletin  of  1915  on  "  County  and  Municipal  Indebted- 
ness "  makes  the  following  statement. 

"  The  civil  divisions  of  the  State  of  Xew  York  reported  a 
total  indebtedness  far  in  excess  of  that  reported  by  any  other 
State.  The  total  indebtedness,  less  sinking  fund  assets  was 
$1,046,226,813,  which  amount  was  equal  to  30.1  per  cent. 
of  the  indebtedness  of  all  civil  divisions  in  the  United  States 
and  more  than  four  times  the  amount  reported  by  Pennsyl- 
vania which  ranks  second  in  total  debt." 

The  per  capita  figures  for  municipal  and  county  indebtedness 
also  show  preeminence  on  the  part  of  Xew  York.  Its  per  capita 
county  and  municipal  debt  is  $107.71.  The  next  highest  per 
capita  debt  of  the  various  states  is  $70.21  for  the  State  of  Wash- 
ington; $61.66  for  Xew  Jersey;  $57.86  for  Oregon;  $52.86  for 
Massachusetts;  $51.18  for  California  and  $47.23  for  Ohio. 

In  eleven  years,  1902  to  1913,  the  per  capita  debt  of  this  class 
in  Xew  York  has  grown  from  $56.56  to  $107.71,  an  increase  of 
90.4  per  cent.  Your  Committee  finds  that  while  the  credit  of  the 
State  is  still  very  high,  this  great  increase  in  its  indebtedness  lias 
been  noticed  and  commented  on  in  the  investment  market  and  that 
there  is  an  increasing  tendency  on  the  part  of  investors  to  scruti- 


3  Doc.  No.  23 

nize  our  securities  and  to  demand  an  improvement  in  our  financial 
methods  of  incurring  and  securing  debt. 

Shortcomings  of  the  Present  Methods 

With  the  general  policy  of  the  provisions  of  Article  Seventh, 
your  Committee  is  in  hearty  accord.  These  provisions  were 
adopted  in  1846  to  remedy  conditions  resulting  from  extrava- 
gance in  the  construction  of  public  improvements  and  the  creation 
of  debt  for  that  purpose  which  had  produced  a  crisis  in  the 
financial  affairs  of  the  State.  In  brief,  the  provisions  of  Article 
Seventh  forbid  the  contraction  of  debts  (excepting  certain 
emergency  debts  provided  for  in  Sections  2  and  3),  unless  the 
law  authorizing  the  debt  has  been  submitted  to  the  people  for 
ratification  at  an  election  where  only  one  such  law  may  be  voted 
for  at  a  time  and  unless  it  also  provides  for  the  payment  of  the 
principal  of  the  debt  within  a  fixed  time  by  a  direct  annual  tax, 
the  proceeds  of  which  are  to  create  a  sinking  fund  for  that  purpose. 

Your  Committee  believes  that  these  restrictions  upon  debts, 
requiring  the  authority  of  the  people  before  their  creation,  and 
permitting  only  one  proposal  to  be  submitted  at  a  time,  have 
exerted  a  conservative  influence  upon  State  policy  which  until 
recently  was  successful  in  keeping  down  the  State  debt. 

Until  recently  it  was  the  settled  policy  of  the  State  to  make  its 
capital  improvements  out  of  current  revenues  without  incurring 
debt  for  the  purpose.  Our  hospitals,  our  'charitable  and  penal 
institutions  and  other  permanent  improvements  have  been  built 
out  of  annual  appropriations  and  until  the  recent  decision  of  the 
people  to  incur  large  indebtedness  for  canal  and  highway  im- 
provements the  State  debt  was  very  small.  Your  Committee 
believes  that  this  is  a  sound  and  proper  policy  for  a  common- 
wealth and  believes  that  this  Convention  should  proceed  with 
extreme  caution  in  removing  these  restrictions. 

Nevertheless,  there  have  developed  certain  serious  shortcomings 
in  the  system  which  should  be  remedied.  The  attempt  to  limit  the 
method  of  taxation  to  direct  taxation  has  not  been  satisfactory  and 
has  been  already  modified  by  the  amendment  of  1906  contained  in 
Section  11  of  the  Article.  The  State  government  has  not  been  suc- 
cessful in  its  methods  of  calculating;  and  collecting  the  contributions 


Doc.  No.  23  4 

for  the  sinking  funds.  As  a  result  in  some  years  a  very  much  larger 
amount  has  been  contributed  than  would  be  necessary  under  scien- 
tific amortization.  In  other  years,  evidently  in  reliance  upon 
such  excessive  contributions  in  the  past,  no  contributions  what- 
ever have  been  made  to  some  of  the  funds.  There  has  thus  re- 
sulted on  the  one  hand  an  unnecessary  and  oppressive  taxation 
of  the  present  generation  while,  on  the  other,  there  has  been  no 
certain  or  automatic  method  provided  for  the  enforcement  of 
sinking  fund  contributions.  The  unnecessary  burden  which  has 
been  put  upon  present  taxpayers  can  be  readily  seen  when  it  is 
stated  that  up  to  September  30,  1914,  there  had  been  contributed 
to  all  of  the  sinking  funds  $34,487,670.41,  where  only  $4,940,- 
095.13  was  required  under  a  3  per  cent,  actuarial  computation, 
making  a  surplus  at  that  date  accrued  of  $29,547,584.28. 

Serial  Bonds  Instead  of  Sinking  Fund  Bonds 
Your  Committee  recommends  that  hereafter  all  debts  except 
emergency  debts  shall  be  based  upon  serial  bonds  payable  in  equal 
instalments.  The  advantages  of  such  a  system  are  so  fundamental 
and  are  so  closely  related  to  sound  governmental  policy,  as  well 
as  to  sound  finance,  that  we  believe  such  a  restriction  to  be  thor- 
oughly worthy  of  a  place  in  the  Constitution.  The  most  certain, 
simple  and  cheap  way  to  amortize  a  debt  is  to  pay  it  off  in  annual 
instalments.  The  uncertainties  of  calculation  which  have  so  un- 
fortunately affected  our  sinking  funds  in  the  past  are  at  once  elim- 
inated. There  is  no  large  fund  left  in  the  hands  of  public  officials 
to  be  cared  for  and  invested  and  reinvested  for  fifty  years  with 
all  the  attendant  risk  and  temptation,  and  the  danger  that  this 
power  of  investment  in  various  local  securities  may  be  perverted 
into  a  political  power  is  entirely  removed.  Furthermore,  the  fact 
that  the  same  administration  which  incurs  a  debt  must  at  once 
begin,  within  one  year,  to  make  provision  for  its  retirement  neces- 
sarily and  strongly  tends  towards  responsibility  and  prudence  in 
the  contraction  of  debt.  Finally,  the  serial  method  produces  an 
immense  saving  in  the  amounts  which  the  State  must  eventually 
pay  to  retire  it.  debt.  If  our  present  canal  dehi  of  $1  L8,000,000 
had  been  composed  of  serial  bonds  finally  maturing  in  fifty  years 


5  Doc.  No.   23 

instead  of  the  present  straight  term  sinking  fund  fifty  year  bonds, 
the  State  government  would  have  saved  $46,077,596.13  according 
to  the  calculation  of  the  Comptroller's  office,  in  the  total  cost  of  re- 
tiring  the  debt,  even  if  we  assume  that  the  sinking  fund  was  able 
to  earn  continually  -t  per  cent,  on  its  investments. 

These  considerations,  in  the  opinion  of  your  Committee,  would 
be  decisive  in  favor  of  serial  bonds  for  the  future  even  if  such 
bonds  w7ere  less  marketable  than  straight  term  sinking  fund 
bonds.  The  administrative  benefits  and  actual  cash  saving  of  the 
serial  method  would,  in  the  end,  far  outweigh  even  a  decided  loss 
in  initial  marketability.  After  careful  investigation,  however, 
your  Committee  is  of  the  opinion  that  serial  bonds  are  quite  as 
marketable  as  sinking  fund  bonds.  At  a  recent  sale  by  the  Finance 
Department  of  New  York  city,  where  a  sale  of  serial  bonds  was 
made  side  by  side  with  sinking  fund  bonds,  the  former  brought, 
when  reduced  to  terms  of  equivalent  maturity,  a  better  price  than 
the  latter,  the  Comptroller  of  the  city  attributing  the  success  of 
the  sale  to  the  serial  bonds.  Inquiry  among  the  large  financial 
houses  of  New  York,  Boston,  Chicago  and  Philadelphia  has 
developed  the  practically  unanimous  opinion  of  those  authori- 
ties that  serial  bonds  are  at  least  as  marketable  as  sinking  fund 
bonds.  The  system  has  already  been  adopted  by  other  States  of 
the  Union  and  is  also  now  in  use  by  many  of  the  cities  and  smaller 
subdivisions  of  this  State. 

The  Life  of  the  Bonds  Shall  Not  Exceed  the  Life  of  the 
Improvement  for  Which  They  Were  Issued 
The  amendment  wrhich  your  Committee  submits  also  provides 
that  hereafter  no  debt  shall  be  contracted  which  shall  run  for  a 
period  longer  than  the  probable  life  of  the  work  or  object  for  which 
the  debt  is  to  be  contracted,  to  be  determined  by  the  Legislature 
under  general  laws.  One  of  the  most  serious  criticisms  which 
your  Committee  finds  has  been  made  against  the  financial  methods 
of  the  State  in  the  past  has  been  its  failure  to  limit  the  life  of  the 
obligations  it  has  incurred  to  the  life  of  the  benefits  which  it 
expected  to  receive  from  the  issue  of  these  obligations.  Thus, 
for  example,  the  State  has  authorized  the  issue  of  $100,000,000 


Doc.  No.  23  6 

of  fifty-year  bonds  for  the  improvement  of  our  highways  and 
between  sixty  and  seventy  millions  of  this  debt  have  already  been 
contracted.  Of  this  amount  your  Committee  finds  that  the  pro- 
ceeds of  approximately  30  per  cent,  have  been  spent  for  construct- 
ing the  surface  of  highways,  the  life  of  which  surface  cannot  or- 
dinarily exceed  four  or  five  years  and  often  is  much  less.  This 
means  that  generations  of  taxpayers  in  this  State  will  be  paying 
heavy  interest  and  sinking  fund  charges  for  improvements  from 
which  they  will  receive  not  an  atom  of  benefit.  Eoad  surface 
which  has  been  purchased  with  some  thirty  millions  of  these 
bonds  will  have  to  be  replaced  perhaps  ten  times  before  the  date 
when  these  bonds  will  become  due.  Your  Committee  finds  that 
this  improvidence  of  method  has  brought  down  upon  it  serious 
condemnation  on  the  part  of  all  dealers  in  our  securities  and  that 
it  is  pointed  out  as  one  of  the  most  serious  evils  now  existing  in 
our  methods. 

After  carefully  considering  various  suggested  methods  for  re- 
form your  Committee  has  reached  the  conclusion  that  the  most 
practical  method  is  that  now  in  force  in  the  State  of  Massachusetts 
where  the  Legislature  provides  by  general  laws  the  length  of  term 
for  which  bonds  may  be  issued  in  respect  to  various  classes  of 
improvements,  making  the  length  of  such  term  correspond  with 
the  anticipated  life  of  the  improvement.  Under  the  terms  of  the 
amendment  submitted  herewith  no  further  debt  can  be  authorized 
until  such  statutes  have  been  passed  by  the  Legislature  in  con- 
formity to  the  policy  thus  laid  down  in  the  Constitution.  At  the 
same  time,  in  order  that  bonds  issued  upon  the  faith  of  such  stat- 
utes may  not  be  invalidated  by  evidence  indicating  that  the  Legis- 
lature was  mistaken  in  its  estimate  of  probable  life,  the  determina- 
tion of  the  Legislature  embodied  in  the  statute  is  made  conclusive. 

Even  with  this  proposed  remedy  in  force  for  the  future  your 
Committee  recognizes  the  seriousness  of  the  situation  which  has 
been  created  by  the  absence  of  such  precaution  in  the  past,  par- 
ticularly in  regard  to  the  highway  debt,  A  very  serious  and 
unjust  burden  has  been  in  this  way  placed  upon  future  taxpayers 
of  the  State.  This  has  been  one  of  the  considerations  which  have 
determined  your  Committee  to  recommend  that  the  present  exces- 


7  Doc.  No.  23 

sive  accumulations  in  some  of  the  sinking  funds  should  not  be 
depleted  for  the  purpose  of  modifying  present  taxation.  The 
unnecessary  burden  thus  cast  upon  present  taxpayers  by  these 
existing  accumulations  in  the  sinking  funds  will  barely  offset  the 
unnecessary  and  unfair  burden  which  has  been  thrown  upon  future 
taxpayers  by  the  highway  debt.  The  present  taxpayers  have  been 
compelled  to  pay  about  $30,000,000  unnecessarily  into  the  sink- 
ing funds.  Future  taxpayers  will  be  compelled  to  pay  about  $30,- 
000,000  for  the  surface  of  highways  from  which  they  will  have 
no  benefit.  The  burden  of  one  generation  will  roughly  balance  the 
bur  leu  of  the  other. 

Treatment  of  the  Peesext  Sinking  Funds 

Your  Committee  has  endeavored  in  its  treatment  of  this  diffi- 
cult subject  to  keep  constantly  in  mind  both  the  credit  of  the 
State  and  the  rights  of  the  bondholders  on  the  one  side,  and  the 
necessity  of  relief  for  the  taxpayers  from  unnecessary  taxation 
on  the  other.  Although  there  is  at  present  in  nearly  all  of  the 
funds  an  accumulation  which  is  wholly  unnecessary  to  a  scientific 
amortization  of  the  debt,  your  Committee  feels  that  it  would  be 
very  unwise  and  improper  to  take  out  of  those  funds  any  of  those 
accumulations.  The  amounts  of  these  fund-  have  been  publicly 
advertised  and  reported  by  the  Comptroller;  purchasers  of  State 
bonds  have  undoubtedly  known  of  and  relied  on  this  information; 
and  to  diminish  the  funds — whether  or  not  it  were  a  violation 
of  contract.  —  would  undoubtedly  seriously  affect  the  Slate's  credit 
and  reputation  for  good  faith. 

Nevertheless,  your  Committee  has  felt  that  it  was  highly  im- 
portant that  a  correct  and  automatic  method  of  accumulation 
should  be  provided  for  these  funds  in  the  future.  Such  a  method, 
we  believe,  is  provided  in  the  amendment  herewith  submitted. 
Each  year  the  Comptroller  must  appraise  the  value  of  the  securi- 
ties in  each  fund  and  calculate  afresh  the  amount  of  the  contri- 
bution which  will  be  annually  required  to  amortize  the  debt  at 
its  maturity,  estimating  the  income  on  the  securities  at  the  con- 
servative rate  of  3  per  cent.  Thereupon  it  is  made  the  duty  of 
the  Legislature  to  appropriate  the  amount  thus  estimated  as  the 
contribution  to  the  fund  for  that  year.      If  the  Legish 


Doc.  No.  23  8 

to  make  thi  appropriation,  the  duty  is  imposed  upon  the  Comp- 
troller, as  the  ehi<  £'  fiscal  i  ffi  ;er  of  the  Stati  .  I  i  take  the  amount 
in  question  from  the  nexi  genei  l!  revenues  of  the  State  in  his 
hands  and  apply  it  to  the  funds  in  question.  The  method  of 
taxation  to  he  employed  is  thus  left  to  the  discretion  of  the 
Legislature  but  if  that  body  fails  to  act,  wh  '  -  entially  a  Hen, 
superior  to  the  current  requirements  of  tbe  State  government,  is 
put  upon  its  genera]  revenues  in  favor  of  the  bondholder. 

The  same  method  of  enforcement  is  al  ;c  made  applicable  to  the 
payment  of  the  instalments  of  principal  and  the  interest  on  all 
future  dents  of  the  State.  Your  Committee  feels  that  in  this 
way  the  completion  of  the  sinking  fund  for  the  old  debt  and  the 
faithful  payment  of  the  recurring  instalments  of  the  new  debt 
i-  made  as  simple  and  automatic  as  possible.  In  order  to  give 
to  the  persons  most  interested  in  the  enforcement  of  tbe  debt  a 
right  to  put  iu  motion  the  machinery  for  its  collection,  an  express 
right  to  mandamus  against  the  Comptroller  is  given  to  the  bond- 
holder. This  remedy  its'  placed  in  the  Constitution  because,  under 
existing  law,  it  would  otherwise  be  doubtful  whether  such  a  writ 
would  lie  against  a  State  officer. 

Three  of  the  existing  sinking  funds  are  so  near  completion  that 
no  further  contributions  to  them  are  required.  The  regular 
accumulations  upon  the  amounts  already  contributed  are  much 
more  than  enough  to  amortize  the  principal  of  the  debt  by  the 
time  of  its  maturity  and  leave  in  addition  a  large  annua!  income 
unnecessary  for  that  purpose.  Your  Committee  recommends  that 
lii::  excess  income  be  applied  to  the  interest  on  the  debt.  Your 
Committee  believes  that  such  application  is  within  the  original 
contract  with  the  bondholders  contemplated  by  the  terms  of  the 
present  Constitution,  and  that,  so  far  as  those  funds  are  con- 
cerned, the  good  faith  of  the  Stale  will  be  literally  maintained 
and  a;  the  same  time  a  certain  measure  of  relief  will  be  afforded 
to  I  he  present  taxpayers. 

Authorization  to   Refund  the  Outstanding   Sinking    Fund 
I  )ebt  with  Serial  Bonds 

Your  Committee  feels'  thai  its  recommendations  would  be  incom- 
plete unless  authority  wore  granted  to  replace  the  presenl  straight 


9  Doc.  No.  23 

term  fifty-year  debt  with  serial  bonds.     Tt  would  be  of  little  avail 
ro  provide  a  new  and  better  system  for  the  future  and  at  the  same 
time  to  leave  the  State  for  over  forty  years  withoul  authority  to 
free  itself  from  the  burdens  and   inconveniences  of  the   system 
be  abandoned  by  exchanging  the  old  form  of  debt  into 
ew.     Of  course,  such  exchange  can  only  be  accomplished  by 
msent   of  the  outstanding  bondholders.      Your   Committee 
finds,  however,  that  even  if  it  were  necessary  to  offer  a  slightly 
higher  rate  of  interest  on  the  new  securities  as  an  inducement  for 
Ling  in  the  old.  the  resulting  saving  in  expense  to  the  Si  ate 
would  be  very  large.     It  has  been  calculated  by  the  State  Comp- 
troller's office  that  if  the  existing  canal  debt  of  one  hundred  and 
eighteen  millions  were  refunded  into  serial  bonds  bearing  a  rate 
of  interest  of  4S4  per  cent,  as  against  the  present  average  rate  of 
less  than  l1^  per  cent.,  the  consequent  saving  to  the  State  wonld 
'■■  ■  than  $34,120,091.91. 
Accordingly,  in  its  submitted  amendment,  your  Committee  liae 
proposed  that  authority  be  given  to  the  Legislature  to  provide  for 
the  exchange  of  the  outstanding  sinking  fund  bonds  into   serial 
bonds  of  the  same  final  maturity  upon  such  terms  and  conditions 
as  the  Legislature  may  authorize  subject  only  to  the  restrictions 
that  the  new  debt  shall  mature  no  later  than  the  old  and  that  the 
total  cost  of  debt  in   its  new  form  shall  not  be  larger  than  the 
cost  to  the  State  of  the  existing  debt. 

Debts  Created  en  Anticipation  of  Eevextes. 
Whatever  express  authority  is  granted  by  the  present  Constitu- 
tion to  the  State  government  to  borrow  for  the  purpose  of  meet- 
ing casual  deficits  in  current  revenues  or  in  anticipation  of  the 
receipt  of  taxes  is  contained  in  section  2  of  article  seventh.  The 
form  of  this  article  is,  in  the  opinion  of  your  Committee,  imper- 
fe  t.  first,  in  that  it  limits  such  borrowing  power  to  a  million 
dollars,  and,  second,  that  it  does  not  strictly  confine  it  to  the  fore- 
going  purposes.  Your  Committee  finds  that  in  1912.  the  State 
issued  $990,000  bonds  under  this  provision  for  the  purpose  of 
acquiring  the  Saratoga  reservation,  thereby  practically  exhausting 
all  of  its  emergency  borrowing  power  in  the  creation  of  a  debt  for 
a  permanent  improvement. 


Doc.  No.  23  10 

During  the  past  year,  owing  to  the  exhaustion  of  its  surplus 
and  the  exigencies  created  by  the  European  War,  the  State  found 
itself  obliged  to  borrow  moneys  for  the  current  expenditures  of 
the  government  in  anticipation  of  the  collection  of  its  taxes. 
Owing  to  the  fact  that  the  amount  named  in  section  2  was  thus 
exhausted  it  was  obliged  to  fall  back  upon  its  implied  power  to 
contract  such  an  indebtedness.  Your  Committee  finds  that  con- 
siderable embarrassment  was  caused  thereby  and  that,  although 
the  Appellate  Division  of  the  Third  Department  has  sustained  the 
State's  contention  that  it  had  such  an  implied  powTer  considerable 
difficulty  was  found  in  the  negotiations  of  its  securities  fur  that 
purpose. 

Your  Committee  thinks  that  this  situation  should  be  put  beyond 
doubt,  and  has,  therefore,  recommended  an  amendment  of  section  2 
which  limits  the  debts  to  be  contracted  thereunder  to  debts  for 
the  purposes  and  within  the  amounts  of  appropriations  already 
made,  the  additional  limitation  being  imposed  that  the  bonds  or 
other  obligations  issued  for  this  purpose  shall  be  payable  and  paid 
within  one  year  from  the  date  of  issue. 

Highway  Debt. 
In  November,  1905,  the  Constitution  was  amended  by  the 
insertion  of  section  12  of  Article  VII,  which  authorized  the 
creation  of  a  debt  for  the  improvement  of  highways  and  provided 
that  the  aggregate  of  the  debt  authorized  by  this  section  should 
not,  at  any  one  time,  exceed  the  sum  of  $50,000,000.  It  also  pro- 
vided that  none  of  the  provisions  of  section  4  of  this  article 
should  apply  to  the  debts  for  the  improvement  of  highways 
thus  authorized  by  section  12.  Seven  years  later,  in  L912,  an 
additonal,  $50,000,000  of  bonds  were  authorized  by  referen- 
dum under  section  1  of  Article  VII.  These  $100,000,000 
of  bonds  for  highway  improvement  have  thus  been  authorized 
under  two  different  sections  of  the  Constitution,  one  of  them  pro- 
viding for  a  referendum  to  the  people  and  the  other  authorizing 
the  issue  of  bonds  without  further  authority  Prom  the  people  than 
that  conferred  by  the  enactmenl  of  section  12.  Under  section  12 
it  would  also  seem  evident  that  the  original  debl  of  $50,000,000, 


11  Doc.  I\To.   23 

as. fast  as  it  is  retired,  may  be  replaced  by  new  issues  of  bonds 
under  the  authority  of  the  Legislature  alone,  provided  only  that 
the  aggregate  outstanding  at  any  one  time  shall  not  exceed 
$50,000,000. 

Your  Committee  sees  no  reason  for  this  divergence  of  methods 
and  of  authority  in  the  creation  of  highway  debts.  It  believes 
that  all  future  debts  created  for  highway  construction  should 
require  the  sanction  of  the  people  of  the  State  expressed  at  a 
referendum  under  the  formalities  and  restrictions  of  section  4. 

The  proposed  amendment  which  it  submits,  therefore,  carries 
out  this  recommendation  and  repeals  the  authority  contained  in 
section  12  for  the  creation  of  any  further  highway  debts  other 
than  under  the  provisions  of  section  4. 

Ratification  of  Existing  Debts. 
Fully  realizing  the  importance  that  there  should  be  no  possible 
misunderstanding  in  the  creation  of  a  new  Constitution  as  to  the 
intention  and  readiness  of  the  State  to  stand  behind  its  existing 
debts  with  the  utmost  good  faith,  your  Committee  has  inserted  in 
the  proposed  amendment  an  express  assurance  to  that  effect. 

Your  Committee  desires  to  express  its  appreciation  of  the 
assistance  it  has  derived  from  the  proposed  amendments  sub- 
mitted by  Messrs.  Parsons,  Wagner,  Blauvelt,  A.  E.  Smith,  Austin, 
R.  B.  Smith,  Lincoln,  Cullinan,  Van  Ness  and  E.  X.  Smith. 
These  amendments  have  been  carefully  considered  and  many  of 
the  proposals  embodied  in  the  amendment  submitted  herewith  by 
your  Committee  have  been  suggested  in  one  or  the  other  of  the 
proposals  submitted  by  these  gentlemen. 

Respectfully  submitted  for  the  Committee. 

HENRY  L.  STIMSON, 
■ Chairman. 

MINORITY   REPORT 

Mr.  Wagner  presented  the  following  minority  report : 

I  disagree  with  the  report  of  the  Committee  on  Finance  so  far 

as  it  relates  to  the  disposition  of  the  excess  in  our  sinking  funds 

for  the  following  reasons  : 

1.  It  fails  to  carry  out  the  indisputable  intent  of  the  people 

when  they  voted  the  canal  and  highway  referendum*,  namely  to 


Doc.  Xo.  23  12 

distribute  equitably  the  payment  of  the  debt  over  a  period  of 
fifty  years. 

2.  The  proposed  amendment  requires  the  future  appropriation 
from  the  general  fund  of  money  to  pay  the  interest  on  existing 
debts,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  more  than  $25,000,000  has 
already  been  taken  improperly  from  the  general  fund  for  this 
purpose.  Xo  further  demands  ought  to  be  made  upon  the  general 
fund  for  sinking  fund  purposes  until  this  large  amount  improp- 
erly taken  in  excess  of  the  legal  requirement  has  been  used  for 
the  purpose  for  which  the  sinking  funds  were  created  under  the 
provisions  of  the  Constitution. 

3.  Its  adoption  would  compel  the  levy  next  year  of  an  unjust 
direct  tax  of  $11,000,000  which  ought  not  to  be  levied,  since  it 
is  conceded  by  everyone  familiar  with  our  sinking  funds  that  the 
excess  in  the  different  funds  can  be  used  for  the  payment  of  the 
interest  upon  the  bonds  without  in  any  way  affecting  the  security 
of  the  investment  or  in  any  way  violating  the  provisions  of  the 
Constitution.  Indeed,  the  excess  has  been  collected  unjustly  from 
the  present  taxpayer  and  we  ought  as  near  as  possible  cure  this 
injustice  by  giving  the  present  taxpayer  the  benefit  of  this  excess. 

4.  For  the  reason  that  while  the  report  favors  the  serial  bond 
method  for  future  State  debts,  the  proposal  for  the  amortization 
of  the  present  funded  debt  does  not  include  or  adopt  the  prin- 
ciple upon  which  the  serial  bond  system  is  based. 

Briefly,  the  history  of  the  principal  sinking  funds  is  as  follows : 
The  first  issue  of  bonds  for  the  barge  canal  consisted  of  $2,000,000 
3  per  cent  18-year  bonds.  By  an  adjustment  made  in  1914,  the 
sinking  fund  now  equals  the  principal  and  its  earnings  meet  the 
interest  charges  from  year  to  year.  The  next  sinking  fund  for 
barge  canal  bonds  was  created  to  provide  for  the  payment  of 
$21,000,000  of  3  per  cent  50-year  bonds  authorized  by  an  amend- 
ment to  the  Constitution  in  r.><>.\  Instead  of  raising  a  tax  as 
provided  by  the  Constitution  to  provide  a  sinking  fund  for  the 
bonds  issued  under  Ibis  authority,  the  Legislature  levied  a  tax  rate 
of  .481  of  a  mill  upon  tin1  entire  valuation  of  the  State  upon 
the  theory  that  a  sinking  fund  should  be  created  for  the  entire 
authorized  issue  d(  $99,000,000  whether  the  bonds  had  been  actu- 


13  Doc.  Xo.   23 

ally  issued  or  not.  The  result  was  the  creation  of  an  unnecessary 
and  illegal  excess  in  this  sinking  fund  of  over  $16,000,000.  In 
other  words,  the  Legislature  provided  a  sinking  fund  in  the  years 
1906,  1007,  1908  and  1009  for  the  bonds  which  had  been  issued 
and  for  the  bonds  which  have  been  issued  since,  and  there  ought 
not  to  be  any  question  about  using  this  excess  for  the  purpose  for 
which  it  was  raised,  that  is,  the  contribution  to  the  sinking  fund 
for  those  bonds  which  were  subsequently  issued. 

The  next  sinking  fund  is  to  provide  for  the  retirement  of  $40,- 
000,000  4  per  cent  50-year  bonds  issued  under  the  authority  of 
another  amendment  to  the  Constitution,  which  permitted  the 
Legislature  to  increase  the  rate  of  interest.  When  the  Legis- 
lature provided  a  tax  rate  for  these  bonds,  it  reduced  it  from  .481 
of  a  mill  to  .4  of  a  mill  although  the  rate  of  interest  had  been 
increased,  thus  disclosing  and  confessing  the  error  which  had  been 
made  in  1006.  Tin's  sinking  fund  also  contains  an  excess  due 
to  the  fact  that  after  the  tax  rate  was  fixed,  the  assessed  valua- 
tion of  the  State  was  greatly  increased  and  the  consequent  con- 
tribution to  the  sinking  fund  was  much  larger  than  was  neces- 
sary and  also  to  the  fact  that  the  earnings  of  the  sinking  fund 
were  much  larger  than  were  contemplated  when  the  tax  rate  was 
fixed. 

The  other  barge  canal  sinking  fund  provides  for  the  retirement 
of  50-year  4l/>  per  cent  bonds  and  this  sinking  fund  has  a  large 
excess  due  to  the  payment  into  it  of  large  amounts  received  for 
premiums  and  accrued  interest.  All  the  canal  sinking  funds  have 
received  premiums  and  accrued  interest  which  are  not  necessary 
to  meet  the  requirement  in  the  Constitution  and  which  are  en- 
tirely unnecessary  for  the  amortization  of  the  bonds. 

The  excess  in  the  highway  sinking  funds  is  due  to  the  fact  that 
the  Constitution  provided  for  the  setting  aside  of  a  proportionate 
part  of  the  debt  each  year  but  failed  to  make  use  of  the  earnings 
of  such  sinking  funds  with  the  result  that  the  earnings  of  the 
funds  have  been  placed  in  the  highway  sinking  funds  and  created 
excesses   to   that   amount. 

The  highway  sinking  funds  have  also  been  unduly  enlarged  by 
the  payment  into  them  of  the  premiums  received  on  the  sale  of 


Doc.  No.  23  14 

bonds.  What  is  true  of  the  barge  canal  sinking  funds  is  also 
true  of  the  barge  canal  terminal  sinking  funds,  of  the  Cayuga  and 
Seneca  sinking  funds  and  the  Palisades  Park  sinking  funds  so 
that  the  unnecessary  amount  in  the  several  funds  as  stated  by  the 
Comptroller  in  his  report  to  this  Convention  is  as  follows: 

The  surplus  or  excess  of  available  resources  over  the  reserves 
calculated  in  accordance  with  the  method  stated  in  the  balance 
sheet,  Exhibit  A,  as  of  April  30,  1915,  was  $28,904,706.05,  classi- 
fied as  follows : 

Canal  Debt  sinking  funds $20,671,850  68 

Highway  Debt  sinking  funds , 8,136,684'  81 

Palisades  Interstate  Park  Debt  sinking  funds.  .  96,170  56 


T 


otal $28,904,706  05 


The  report  of  the  Finance  Committee  accompanying  their  pro- 
posal condemns  the  creation  of  this  large  excess  in  the  several 
sinking  funds  and  admits  that  it  was  placed  there  improperly 
and  through  an  error  in  judgment  and  not  through  any  require- 
ment of  the  Constitution.  Nevertheless,  their  proposal  does  not 
permit  the  use  of  any  of  this  excess  for  the  purpose  for  which  it 
was  created,  and  the  Committee  gives  as  its  reasons  for  not  re- 
lieving the  taxpayer  by  the  use  of  these  funds  in  excess  of  the 
requirement  that  the  purchasers  of  the  bonds  knew  of  the  exist- 
ence of  these  abnormal  sinking  funds  and  that  it  would  therefore 
be  a  violation  of  good  faith  on  the  part  of  the  State  to  use  them 
and  consequently  would  impair  the  credit  of  the  State.  The 
contention  of  the  Committee  in  this  regard  is  not  convincing 
because  the  purchasers  of  the  bonds  also  knew  what  the  consti- 
tutional provisions  for  sinking  funds  were  and  purchased  the  bonds 
with  that  knowledge.  So  far  as  impairing  the  credit  of  the  State 
is  concerned,  for  two  years  in  three  different  sinking  funds  the 
State  has,  through  the  Legislature,  made  use  of  a  portion  of  this 
excess  and  there  has  been  no  impairment  of  the  credit  of  the 
State  because  the  sale  of  bonds  subsequent  to  this  action  of  the 
Legislature  produced  the  greatest  premium  that  the  State  ever 
received  and  furthermore  since  this  action  of  the  Legislature,  the 
value  of  the  State  bonds  involved  has  increased  and  not  decreased. 


15  Doc.  No.  23 

The  Committee  also  leaves  open  the  question  of  the  legality  of 
using  any  part  of  the  sinking  fund.  Without  attempting  to  dis- 
cuss that  question,  the  fact  that  the  Committee  itself  proposes 
in  the  future  to  use  a  part  of  the  excess  destroys  the  force  of  that 
contention.  The  other  reason  for  not  using  any  part  of  the  ex- 
cess in  the  sinking  funds,  which  is  set  forth  by  the  Committee,  is 
that  the  highway  honds  are  fifty-year  bonds  while  the  highway 
improvement  will  last  only  a  few  years,  and  the  Committee  con- 
tends that  for  that  reason  future  taxpayers  will  be  burdened  with 
a  tax  for  which  they  received  no  benefit  equal  to  the  tax  which 
the  present  taxpayers  have  been  obliged  to  pay  by  the  creation 
of  the  excess  in  the  sinking  funds.  This  contention  of  the  Com- 
mittee is  made  on  the  assumption  that  the  highway  improvements 
last  for  four  or  live  years  in  some  cases  and  then  are  lost  to  the 
State.  The  fact  is  that  poor  judgment  on  the  part  of  the  High- 
way Department  caused  the  construction  of  a  considerable  number 
of  State  roads  which  could  not  endure  for  more  than  six  or  seven 
years.  They  have  also  constructed  many  roads  which  ought  to 
endure  during  the  life  of  the  bond,  but  in  the  case  where  the 
improvement  is  short-lived  the  present  taxpayer  has  to  provide 
out  of  the  general  funds  of  the  State  each  year  money  to  place 
these  roads  will  be  used  by  the  future  taxpayer  with  the  same 
these  roads  will  be  used  by  the  future  taxpayers  with  the  same 
enjoyment  and  benefit  as  if  they  were  originally  constructed  in 
permanent  form,  the  future  taxpayer  will  only  pay  his  portion 
of  the  debt. 

It  will  be  noticed  by  examining  the  Comptroller's  report  to 
this  Convention,  which  is  Document  Xo.  IS,  that  there  is 
now  in  the  sinking  funds  a  total  of  $40,568,351.32  available. 
according  to  the  report,  for  both  interest  and  principal  of  the 
debt;  that  of  this  sum  of  $40,568,351.32  there  is  an  excess  over 
the  reserve  required  of  $28,004,700.05.  It  is  my  contention  that 
this  excess  should  be  applied  to  the  purpose  for  which  the  several 
sinking  funds  were  created,  namely,  the  payment  of  principal 
and  interest.  In  that  way  we  can  avoid  next  year  a  direct  tax 
of  over  $11,000,000.  I  particularly  urge  this  action  at  this  time, 
not  only  because  it  is  just  to  the  present  taxpayer  who  has  paid 


Doc.  No.  23  16 

this  excess,  and  the  use  of  the  excess  will  not  in  any  way  affect 
the  integrity  of  the  sinking  fund  or  the  security  of  the  bond- 
holder, but  particularly  because  it  will  lift  a  burden  from  the 
shoulders  of  the  taxpayers  of  New  York  city  which  they  can 
hardly  bear  in  view  of  the  tremendous  budget,  for  local  purposes, 
of  the  city  of  New  York. 

For  the  reasons  as  stated,  I  disagree  with  the  report  of  the 
Committee  in  that  it  did  not  make  this  additional  requirement  of 
using  the  excess  for  the  payment  of  interest  now,  but  so  far  as 
their  other  recommendations  are  concerned  I  heartily  concur  in 

their  views. 

ROBERT  WAGNER. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  24 


REPORT  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  INDUSTRIAL  IN- 
TERESTS AND  RELATIONS  RELATIVE  TO  PROPOSED 
AMENDMENTS,  No.  195  (Int.  194);  No.  196  (Int.  195), 
AND  No.  419  (Int.  407) 


July  26,  1915 

Mr.  Parsons,  from  the  Committee  on  Industrial  Interests  and 
Relations,  to  which  was  referred  Proposed  Amendment  introduced 
by  Mr.  A.  E.  Smith  (No.  195,  Int.  No.  194),  entitled  "  Pro- 
posed constitutional  amendment  to  amend  Article  III  of  the  Con- 
stitution by  inserting  a  new  section,  in  relation  to  delegation  of 
legislative  power  in  matters  affecting  employees,"  reported  as 
follows : 

The  Committee  on  Industrial  Interests  and  Relations  recom- 
mends the  passage  of  the  said  amendment  with  the  following 
amendments : 

Strike  out  in  line  4  the  words  "  in  its  discretion  ". 

Strike  out  in  lines  4  and  5  the  words  "  duly  constituted  "  and 
insert  in  lieu  thereof  the  words  "  State  board  or  ". 

Strike  out  in  line  5  the  words  "  board  or  administrative 
agency  ". 

Strike  out  in  line  6  the  word  "  varying  ". 


Doc.  No.  24  2 

Strike  out  in  line  7  the  words  "  to  existing  conditions  "  and 
insert  in  lieu  thereof  the  following  ",  according  to  varying  con- 
ditions,". 

Strike  out  in  line  8  the  words  "  comfort  "  and  "  general  ". 

Strike  out  in  line  9  the  word  "  employees  "  and  insert  in  lieu 
thereof  the  words  "  any  class  or  classes  of  persons  or  the  public 
generally  ". 

which  report  was  agreed  to,  and  said  proposition  ordered  reprinted 
as  amended,  and  referred  to  the  Committee  of  the  Whole. 

The  object  of  this  Proposed  Amendment  is  to  enable  the  Legis- 
lature to  delegate  some  of  its 


power. 


The  complexity  of  modern  industrial  conditions  is  such  that 
it  is  impossible  for  the  Legislature,  in  dealing  with  them  to  have 
in  mind  their  great  variety  and  to  deal  with  each  of  them  ade- 
quately and  fairly.  This  results  in  laws  which  are  unnecessarily 
harsh  in  their  application  to  some  conditions  and  which  affect 
others  which  they  were  not  intended  to  affect. 

While  the  Legislature  may  now  authorize  the  making  of  rules 
and  regulations  and  in  that  way  delegate  some  of  its  functions,  it 
may  only  "  delegate  the  power  to  determine  some  facts  or  state 
of  things  upon  which  a  statute  makes,  or  intends  to  make,  its 
own  action  depend."  8  Cyc.  of  Law  and  Practice,  p.  830 ;  Ruling- 
Case  Laws,  Sec.  179. 

It  cannot  delegate  powers  which  are  "  inherently  and  ex- 
clusively legislative."  Village  of  Saratoga  Springs  v.  Saratoga 
Gas,  Electric  Light  and  Power  Co.,  191  X.  Y.  123,  at  p.  133. 
The  result  of  this  is  that  rules  and  regulations  cannot  be  formu- 
lated to  deal  with  some  situations  as  to  which  a  board  or  commis- 
sion can,  as  a  practical  matter,  better  determine  what  should  be 
done  than  can  the  Legislature. 

For  instance,  the  Court  of  Appeals  has  held  that  it  was  a  dele- 
gation of  "  inherently  and  exclusively  legislative  "  power,  and 
therefore  unconstitutional,  to  insert  in  the  one  day  of  rest  in 
seven  law  a  provision  exempting  "  employees,  if  the  Commissioner 
of  Labor  in  his  discretion  approves,  engaged  in  the  work  of  any 
industrial  or  manufacturing  process  necessarily  continuous  in 
which  no  employee  is  permitted  to  work  more  than  eight  hours  in 
any  calendar  day",  *  *  *  "because  of  the  attempt  which 
the  Legislature  has  made  to  delegate  its  power  to  the  ( Jommissioner 
of  Labor".     People  v.  Klinch  Mfg.  Co.,  214  X.  Y.,  at  p.  138. 


3  Doc.  No.  21 

There  is  a  law  against  smoking  in  factories.  There  are  some 
factories,  however,  where  there  is  no  danger  from  smoking,  and 
where  it  could  reasonably  be  allowed.  It  has  been  found  im- 
practicable to  draw  a  general  statute  which  would  leave  it  to  the 
Commissioner  to  find  facts  so  as  to  allow  the  exemption.  In  such 
cases  a  board  or  commission  sitting  throughout  the  year  could  give 
fuller  hearings  than  can  the  Legislature,  and  could  more  fairly 
classify  the  exemptions  which  should  be  made. 

The  delegation  of  such  power  would  make  more  effective  the 
work  of  the  State  Industrial  Commission,  which  was  created,  as 
had  been  the  Industrial  Board,  to  meet  the  needs  of  the  industrial 
situation. 

Both  the  representatives  of  employers  and  the  representatives 
of  employees  who  were  heard  before  your  committee  approved  such 
a  delegation  of  power. 

The  power  can  only  be  delegated  to  a  body  consisting  of  more 
than  one,  inasmuch  as  the  terms  "  board  "  and  "  commission  " 
imply  more  than  one  person.     Wilson  v.  Bleloch,  125  A.  D.  191. 

The  phrase  "  rules  and  regulations "  implies  "  uniformity, 
publicity  and  the  establishment  of  standards  *  *  *.  A 
rule  must  necessarily  be  of  general  application,  and  a  regulation 
must  apply  impartially."  State  Racing  Commission  v.  Latonia 
Agricultural  Association,  123  S.  W.,  G81,  685. 

This  limited  delegation  of  power  would  not  permit  favoritism 
in  individual  cases,  but  would  require  rules  for  all  similarly 
situated. 

The  words  "  supplementing  ",  "  modifying  "  and  "  adapting  " 
are  defined  to  mean  the  following: 

Supplementing.  Adding  to  anything  to  make  it  more  full  and 
complete.  Filling  up,  or  supplying  by  additions,  making  up  de- 
ficiencies in. 

Modifying.  Qualifying;  especially  moderating  or  reducing  in 
extent  or  degree;  altering  slightly  or  not  very  much;  varying. 

Adapting.  Making  suitable;  making  to  correspond;  suiting; 
fitting  by  altering,  modifying  or  remodeling  for  a  different  pur- 
pose; making  by  altering  or  fitting  something  else:  producing  by 
changing  of  form  or  character. —  {Century  Dictionary.) 

This  amendemnt  is  a  mere  grant  of  power  to  the  Legislature. 
The  Legislature  may  impose  such  limitations  upon  its  exercise  by 


Doc.  No.  24  4 

those  to  whom  it  delegates  the  power  as  it  sees  fit.  and  would 
presumably  reserve  the  right  to  annul  at  any  time  any  action  taken 
under  such  delegation  of  power. 

HERBERT  PARSONS, 

( 'hair man, 
Committee  on  Industrial  Interests  and  Relations. 

Mr.  Parsons,  from  the  Committee  on  Industrial  Interests  and 
Relations,  to  which  was  referred  Proposed  Amendment  introduced 
by  Mr.  A.  E.  Smith  (No.  196,  Int.  No.  195),  and  Proposed 
Amendment  introduced  by  Mr.  Parsons  (No.  419,  Int.  No.  4<»7  . 
both  of  which  relate  to  the  power  of  the  Legislature  to  prohibit 
manufacturing  in  dwellings,  reported  as  follows : 

The  Committee  on  Industrial  Interests  and  Relations  recom- 
mends the  passage  of  Proposed  constitutional  amendment  (  No. 
419,  Int.  No.  407),  entitled  "Proposed  constitutional  amend- 
ment to  amend  Article  III  of  the  Constitution,  in  regard  to  the 
power  of  the  Legislature  to  prohibit  manufacturing  in  structures 
used  for  dwelling  purposes,"  without  amendment, 
which  report  was  agreed  to,  and  said  Proposed  Amendment  re- 
ferred to  the  Committee  of  the  Whole. 

There  is  question  whether  the  police  power  of  the  State  as 
declared  by  the  courts  is  extensive  enough  to  prohibit  manu- 
facture in  dwellings.  This  is  due  to  the  decision  of  the  Court  of 
Appeals,  in  Matter  of  Jacobs,  98  N.  Y.  99,  where  an  act  which 
prohibited  the  manufacture  of  cigars  in  any  part  of  any  floor 
which  was  occupied  for  the  purposes  of  living,  sleeping,  cooking 
or  doing  any  household  work  in  a  tenement  house  was  held  un- 
constitutional and  in  which  Judge  Earl,  writing  the  opinioi]  of 
the  court,  said  (at  p.  113)  : 

"  To  justify  this  law,  it  would  not  be  sufficient  that  the  * 
manipulation  (of  tobacco)  may  be  injurious  to  those  who  are 
engaged  in  its  preparation  and  manufacture;  but  it  would  have 
to.be  injurious  to  the  public  health.  *  *  *  It  cannot  be  per- 
ceived how  the  cigarniaker  is  to  be  improved  in  his  health  or  in 
his  morals  by  forcing  him  from  his  home  with  its  hallowed 
associations  and  beneficent  influences  to  ply  his  trade  elsewhere 
*  *  "  What  possible  relation  can  cigar  making  in  any  build- 
ings have  to  the  health  of  the  general  public?     * 

Earlier   in   the  opinion  the  court   had   said   of   the  cigarniaker 
(p.  104): 


5  Doc.  No.  24 

"  He  may  choose  to  do  his  work  where  he  can  have  the  super- 
vision of  his  family  and  their  help,  *  *  *.  He  may  desire 
the  advantage  of  cheap  production  in  consequence  of  his  cheap 
rent  and  family  help,  and  of  this  he  is  deprived." 

Even  if  it  be  argued  that  later  opinions  of  the  court  would 
justify  such  legislation,  the  power  should  not  be  left  in  doubt. 

Some  of  the  objections  to  permitting  manufacture  in  dwellings 
are  the  following: 

The  public  health  is  imperilled.  Sanitary  laws  and  regula- 
tions of  manufacture  cannot  be  enforced,  nor  can  restrictions  on 
the  hours  of  labor  of  women  and  children  be  enforced  or  their 
night  work  prevented.  Tenement  manufacture  is  a  breeder  of 
tuberculosis.  We  spend  vast  sums  of  money  to  cure  tuberculosis, 
a  large  amount  of  which  is  caused  by  manufacture  in  tenements 
which  we  do  not  prevent.  To  allow  manufacture  in  dwellings 
operates  unfairly  to  the  enlightened  manufacturer  who  prefers 
to  have  his  employees  work  in  sanitary  surroundings.  His  com- 
petitor who  has  the  work  done  in  dwellings  is  relieved  of  the 
cost  of  rent,  light  and  fuel  and  of  maintaining  sanitary  condi- 
tions, and  all  other  laws  regulating  factory  buildings.  Manu- 
facture in  dwellings  is  manufacture  at  very  low  compensation 
and  depresses  the  general  wage  scale.  It  tends  to  aggravate 
irregularity  of  employment.  The  manufacturer  endeavors  to 
keep  a  supply  of  capable  employees  for  his  factory.  This  is  un- 
necessary if  he  is  contracting  out  his  work  to  be  performed  in 
dwellings.  One  of  the  worst  results  of  manufacture  in  dwellings 
is  the  use  of  the  labor  of  children.  Very  young  children  can  be 
and  arc  employed.  Their  employment  cannot  be  prevented  be- 
cause it  would  require  an  army-  of  inspectors  to  prevent  it.  As 
soon  as  an  inspector  enters  the  ground  floor  of  a  tenement  the 
children  on  the  other  floors  can  be  dismissed  from  their  work, 
and  the  inspector  finds  nothing.  It  also  leads  to  lack  of  school 
attendance. 

There  is,  of  course,  a  great  deal  of  work  done  in  dwellings 
which  is  not  at  all  objectionable.  It  will  be  for  the  Legislature 
to  so  legislate  under  the  power  which  this  amendment  gives  that 
such  work  will  not  be  interfered  with. 

HERBERT  PAKSOXS. 

Chairman, 
Committee  on  Industrial  Interests  and  Relations. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  25 


REPORT  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  PUBLIC  UTILITIES 
RELATIVE  TO  PROPOSED  AMENDMENTS,  No.  715 
(Int.  98);  No.  161  (Int.  161);  No.  718  (Int.  249);  No.  494 
(Int.  482);  No.  655  (Int.  639);  No.  708  (Int.  688) 


July  28,  1915 

Mr.  Hale,  from  the  Committee  on  Public  Utilities,  submitted 
the  following  report: 

The  Committee  on  Public  Utilities  to  which  were  referred, 

First:  Proposed  Amendment  introduced  by  Mr.  Foley  (No. 
715,  Int.  No.  98),  entitled  "  Proposed  coDstitutional  amendment, 
to  amend  Article  V  of  the  Constitution,  by  adding  a  new  section 
thereto  in  relation  to  public  service  commissions  for  the  first  and 
second  districts ;" 

Second:  Proposed  Amendment  introduced  by  Mr.  Schurman 
(No.  161,  Int.  No.  161),  entitled  "  Proposed  constitutional 
amendment,  to  amend  Article  V  of  the  Constitution  by  adding  a 
new  section  thereto  in  relation  to  public  service  commissions;" 

Third:  Proposed  Amendment  introduced  by  Mr.  Olcott  (No. 
718,  Int.  No.  249),  entitled  li  Proposed  constitutional  amend- 
ment, to  amend  the  Constitution  by  adding  a  new  article  creating 
public  utilities  commissions  and  prescribing  their  jurisdiction, 
powers  and  duties;" 

Fourth:  Proposed  Amendment  introduced  by  Mr.  Coles  (No. 
494,  Int.   No.   48'2),   entitled   "Proposed  constitutional  amend- 


Doc.  No.  25  2 

merit,  to  amend  Article  V  of  the  Constitution  by  adding  a  new 
section  thereto  in  relation  to  public  service  commissions;" 

Fifth:  Proposed  Amendment  introduced  by  Mr.  Hinnian  (  No. 
655,  Int.  No.  639),  entitled  "Proposed  constitutional  amend- 
ment, to  amend  the  Constitution  by  adding  a  new  article  creating 
public  service  commissions  and  prescribing  their  jurisdiction, 
powers  and  duties;"  and 

Sixth:  Proposed  amendment  introduced  by  Mr.  Landreth 
(No.  708,  Int.  No.  688),  entitled  "Proposed  constitutional 
amendment,  to  amend  Article  V  of  the  Constitution  in  relation 
to  the  public  service  commission,  its  powers  and  duties;" 

Reported  by  Proposed  Amendment,  entitled  "  Proposed  consti- 
tutional amendment,  to  amend  Article  V  of  the  Constitution  by 
adding  a  new  section  thereto  relating  to  public  service  commis- 
sions" (Tnt.  No.  706),  which  was  read  twice,  and  said  com- 
mittee reports  in  favor  of  the  passage  of  said  proposed  amend- 
ment, which  report  was  agreed  to  and  said  proposition  ordered 
printed  and  referred  to  the  Committee  of  the  Whole. 


MINORITY    REPORT 

Mr.  Kirby  presented  the  following  minority  report: 
To  ihc  Convention: 

The  undersigned  herein-  dissents  from  the  report  of  the  <  !om- 
mitteo  on  Public  Utilities,  relative  to  the  office  of  Public  Service 
Commissioners,  and  gives  the  following  reasons  therefor: 

First:  That  the  continuation  in  office  of  the  commissioners  in 
the  Second  District  at  the  present  salary  of  $15,000  each,  and  at 
a  greater  salary  than  judges  of  the  Court  of  Appeals  and  justice-, 
of  the  Supremo  Court,  except  in  the  first  department,  should  ao1 
be  tolerated. 

Second:  That  the  proposal  of  tin1  committee  does  not  prevent 
the  Legislature  from  further  raising  the  compensation  of  the 
commissioners. 

Third:  That  the  right  to  review,  ami  the  extent  and  manner 
thereof,  of  the  decisions  and  orders  of  the  commission  should  not 
he  left  to  the  Legislature  hut  should  he  fixed  by  the  Convention. 

Thomas  A.  Kirby. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN   CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.   26 


REPORT  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  RELATIONS  TO  THE 
INDIANS,  RELATIVE  TO  PROPOSED  AMENDMENT 
No.  769  (Int.  707) 


Mr.  Lindsay,  from  the  Committee  on  Relations  to  the  Indians, 
to  which  have  been  referred  several  proposed  amendments  relating 
to  abolishing  of  Indian  courts  and  extending  the  laws  of  the  State 
of  New  York  to  the  Indians,  reports  by  proposed  constitutional 
amendment  entitled  "  Proposed  constitutional  amendment  to 
amend  Section  fifteen  of  Article  I  of  the  Constitution  of  the  State 
of  New  York,  in  relation  to  Indians  "  (Int.  No.  707),  which  was 
read  twice  and  said  committee  reports  in  favor  of  the  passage  of 
the  same,  which  report  was  agreed  to,  and  said  proposed  amend- 
ment ordered  printed  and  referred  to  the  Committee  of  the  Whole. 

The  following  reasons,  among  others,  are  presented  in  support 
of  said  report: 

Your  Committee  is  convinced  that  the  time  has  come  when  the 
Indians  of  the  State  of  New  York  should  be  treated  as  civilized 
persons,  and  not  as  barbarians.  The  theory  of  the  State  and 
Federal  Government  for  more  than  a  century  has  been  to  treat 
them  as  dependents,  in  a  state  of  tutelage,  with  the  ultimate  end 
in  view  of  full  citizenship.  Although  this  policy  has  been  pursued 
through  four  generations,  our  method  of  governing  these  people, 
our  attitude  toward  them,  and  their  knowledge  of  our  laws  remain 
practically  as  they  were  a  half  century  ago. 


Doc.  No.  26  2 

During  that  period  the  American  Negro,  at  the  beginning  of 
the  period  fully  as  incapable  of  self  government  as  the  Indian,  has 
passed  from  slavery  and  dense  ignorance  to  good  citizenship  and 
comparative  intellectuality.  Indeed,  when  the  American  Indian 
in  this  State  was  an  intelligent,  independent,  and,  in  a  measure, 
self  governing  individual,  the  American  Negro  was  much  lower  in 
the  scale  of  civilization,  and  was  a  slave.  The  reason  for  the 
progress  of  the  Negro,  and  the  stagnant  condition  of  the  Indian 
is  not  hard  to  find.  One  associated  with  the  white  man,  was  gov- 
erned by  his  laws,  later  had  the  benefit  of  these  laws  conferred 
upon  him,  and  was  compelled  to  know  and  obey  them ;  the  other, 
treated  as  a  child,  left  to  his  own  devices  and  government,  in  doubt 
as  to  his  allegiance  and  rights  under  our  laws,  has  drifted  along 
without  an  object  and  without  hope  as  to  his  future.  Ultimate 
citizenship  has  been  the  cry  of  presidents  and  governors  in  their 
recommendations,  of  commissioners  of  the  Federal  Government 
and  of  this  State,  for  nearly  a  century ;  while  the  method  of  gov- 
ernment of  the  Indians  in  New  York  during  all  that  time  has 
tended  in  exactly  the  opposite  direction. 

In  1888,  the  Legislature  of  this  State  appointed  a  commission, 
of  which  Mr.  Whipple  of  this  Committee  was  Chairman,  to  in- 
vestigate and  report  on  almost  every  phase  of  the  State  Indian 
problem.  This  Commission  performed  its  duties  with  thorough- 
ness, and  made  a  report  in  January,  1889,  covering  in  detail  and 
with  the  greatest  fullness  and  accuracy,  all  questions  relating  to 
the  lands,  moral  and  social  condition,  government  and  needs  of 
the  Indians,  and  collecting  in  the  report  the  treaties,  laws  and 
contracts  which  relate  thereto.  This  report,  commonly  known  as 
the  Whipple  report,  among  other  things,  made  the  following  rec- 
ommendation : 

(4)  "  The  repeal  of  all  existing  laws  relating  to  the  Indians 
of  the  State,  excepting  those  prohibiting  the  sale  of  liquors  to 
them  and  intrusion  upon  their  lands,  the  extension  of  the  laws  of 
the  State  over  them,  and  their  absorption  into  citizenship." 

Practically  nothing  has  been  done  by  the  Legislature  in  pur- 
suance of  such  recommendation. 

In  1905,  the  Legislature  appointed  another  Committee  to  in- 
quire and  report  upon  the  powers  of  the  State  to  legislate  for  the 


3  Doc.  No.  26 

Indians,  and  what,  if  any,  additional  legislation  was  needed.  This 
Committee,  for  which  Mr.  Kay  B.  Smith  of  this  Convention  was 
counsel,  took  evidence  upon  the  various  reservations  and  else- 
where, and  in  1906  made  its  report.  Both  the  Whipple  Com- 
mission and  this  Committee  strongly  condemned  the  Indian  courts, 
the  law  conferring  upon  the  peacemakers  of  the  Seneca  Indians 
on  the  Allegheny  and  Cattaraugus  reservations  exclusive  power 
over  marriage  and  divorce,  and  the  unsettled  condition  of  the  In- 
dian with  reference  to  our  laws  and  the  jurisdiction  of  our  courts. 
Still  nothing  has  been  done. 

Our  present  Indian  laws  are  substantially  as  they  were  enacted 
from  1813  to  1819,  except  that  the  exclusive  power  over  marriage 
and  divorce  was  conferred  on  the  peacemakers'  courts  of  the  Al- 
legheny and  Cattaraugus  reservations  by  Chapter  371,  Laws  of 
1859.  Very  few  of  these  laws  are  of  a  general  nature  applying  to 
all  Indians  within  the  State.  The  Indians  on  the  Tonawanda, 
Allegheny  and  Cattaraugus  reservations  have  peacemakers'  courts ; 
the  two  last  named  have  Surrogates'  Courts,  and  the  Tonawandas 
have  not ;  the  peacemakers'  courts  of  the  Allegheny  and  Catta- 
raugus reservations  have  exclusive  jurisdiction  over  marriage  and 
divorce,  and  the  Tonawandas  have  not.  The  Tuscaroras,  Onon- 
dagas,  St.  Regis,  and  Shinnecocks  have  no  courts  of  any  kind.  The 
power  to  contract  is  conferred  upon  all  Indians,  and  then  nullified 
in  the  same  section  by  a  provision  forbidding  any  person  to  sue 
an  Indian  of  the  Tonawanda  or  Seneca  nation  or  Onondaga  tribe 
upon  any  contract  under  heavy  penalties,  leaving  the  St.  Regis, 
Tuscarora,  Oneida  and  Shinnecock  Indians  open  to  such  suits. 
The  statute  extends  the  State  laws  as  to  marriage  and  divorce  to 
all  Indians,  and  in  the  same  section  excepts  those  on  the  Allegheny 
and  Cattaraugus  reservations.  This  report  cannot  be  extended 
to  indicate  all  these  anomalies  and  contradictions  in  our  present 
Indian  law. 

At  the  present  time  in  the  great  State  of  Xew  York,  on  the  Al- 
legheny and  Cattaraugus  reservations,  two  ignorant  Indians, 
called  jDeacemakers,  may  at  the  request  of  an  Indian,  release  him 
from  his  wife,  and  set  her  adrift  without  provision  or  remedy,  and 
without  any  trial,  except  an  informal  hearing.  She  may  appeal 
to  the  Indian  Council,  but  the  evidence  shows  it  seldom  acts.  She 
cannot  have  any  relief  under  our  laws  or  in  our  Courts. 


Doc.  No.  26  4 

It  is  a  piece  of  patchwork,  out  of  date,  and  its  worst  features 
enacted  to  suit  the  whims  of  certain  classes  of  the  Indians.  The 
evidence  taken  by  the  various  commissions,  as  well  as  communi- 
cations from  the  better  class  of  Indians  who  desire  some  relief 
from  present  conditions,  show  conclusively  that  the  present  con- 
ditions of  the  laws  is  fostering  shiftlessness,  immorality,  and 
crime  upon  the  reservations,  and  retarding  the  development  of 
the  Indian  toward  good  citizenship. 

No  doubt  the  failure  of  the  State  to  take  some  drastic  action 
heretofore  has  been  because  of  doubt  as  to  how  far  the  State 
could  extend  its  laws.  Your  Committee  is  convinced  that  there 
is  nothing  to  prevent  legislation  on  the  part  of  the  State,  in  prac- 
tically every  instance  where  the  Federal  Government  has  not  as- 
sumed to  legislate.  It  is  remarkable  that  the  Federal  Government 
has  never  assumed  by  treaty,  or  laws,  to  govern  the  Indians  within 
this  State.  It  has  by  treaty  guaranteed  them  in  the  possession  of 
their  lands,  provided  for  the  punishment  of  certain  crimes  of  a 
more  important  nature,  restrained  them  in  their  contracts  with 
agents  and  attorneys  respecting  collection  of  claims,  etc.,  but  never 
provided  any  code  of  laws  governing  them.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
State  has,  from  its  earliest  existence,  passed  laws  for  their  gov- 
ernment and  control,  which  have  been  approved  by  the  Courts.  In 
consolidating  the  laws  of  this  State  in  1909,  the  schedule  of  laws 
repealed  shows  about  160  chapters  of  Indian  enactments  running 
from  1779  to  1902,  as  repealed;  so  that  the  State  has  always  as- 
sumed to  act,  while  the  Federal  Government,  for  over  a  hundred 
years,  has  been  content  to  withhold  such  action  for  the  Indians  of 
this  State. 

Ordinary  justice  requires  that  the  Indian  should  be  recognized 
in  our  Constitution,  that  he  be  guaranteed  the  protection  of  our 
laws  and  the  process  of  our  courts  to  enforce  his  rights.  Exper- 
ience shows  that  legislatures  shift  the  responsibility  to  Commit- 
tees of  Investigation  or  to  Congress,  and  when  the  Federal  Gov- 
ernment fails  to  act,  as  it  has  always  done,  the  matter  is  aban- 
doned  and    forgotten. 

The  amendment  proposed  is  not  intended  to  affect,  nor  can  if 
in  any  way  affect,  the  tribal  lands  of  the  Indians,  nor  does  it  in- 
terfere with  the  maintenance  of  their  tribal  relations.  Its  object 
is  mainly  to  insure  to  the  Indians  justice  among  themselves  by 


5  Dor.  No.  26 

abolishing  the  inefficient  and  often  corrupt  tribal  courts  which  a 
few  reservations  have,  and  conferring  the  protection  of  our  State 
courts  upon  all  alike. 

Your  Committee  has  been  requested  to  submit  for  the  infor- 
mation of  the  Convention  a  condensed  statement  of  the  title  and 
law  governing  Indian  lands  and  the  position  of  the  law  as  to  gov- 
ernment of  Indians  in  this  State,  and  for  that  purpose  submit-- 
the  following: 

INDIAN  LANDS  IN  NEW  YORK 

The  United  States  never  had,  and  has  not  now,  any  title  or 
right  to  the  lands  of  the  Indians  in  this  State.  The  title,  that  is, 
the  preemptive  right  to  all  these  lands  was  originally  vested  i.u 
either  the  commonwealth  of  Massachusetts  under  the  grant  to  the 
colony  in  1628,  or  in  the  State  of  New  York  under  the  grant  to 
the  Duke  of  York  in  1664.  This  title  is  what  has  been  called  the 
preemptive  right  —  that  is,  the  right  to  extinguish  the  Indian 
title  of  possession,  by  purchase  or  treaty  —  after  which  the  lands 
would  belong  to  the  State. 

In  1786  the  State  of  New  York  and  the  commonwealth  of  Mass- 
achusetts, with  the  consent  of  the  United  States,  settled  their 
differences,  Massachusetts  thereby  ceding,  granting,  releasing  and 
confirming  to  New  York  forever  all  its  claim,  right  and  title  "  to 
the  Government,  sovereignty  and  jurisdiction "  of  the  lands 
claimed  by  the  State  of  New  York ;  and  the  State  of  New  York 
ceding,  granting,  releasing  and  confirming  to  Massachusetts  and 
to  the  use  of  the  commonwealth,  their  grantees  and  the  heirs  and 
assigns  of  such  grantees  forever,  the  right  of  preemption  of  the 
soil  from  the  native  Indians,  and  all  their  estate,  right,  title  and 
property  (the  right  of  title  of  Government,  sovereignty  and  juris- 
diction excepted)  in  that  portion  of  the  said  lands  which  included 
practically  the  whole  of  New  York  (except  a  mile  along  Niagara 
river )  west  of  a  line  drawn  north  and  south  from  a  point  82  miles 
west  of  the  northeast  corner  of  Pemisy'  vania ;  together  with  some 
other  lands  between  the  Owego  and  Chenango  rivers. 

Massachusetts  then  ceded  the  like  preemption  right  of  all  other 
lands  claimed  in  New  York  to  this  State,  and  reserved  the  right 
to  assign  its 'preemption  right  to  persons  who  thus  would  be  able 


Doc.  No.  26  6 

to  extinguish  the  Indian  title;  but  purchases  from  the  Indians 
were  to  be  void  unless  approved  by  a  superintendent  appointed 
by  that  State  and  confirmed  by  it. 

Massachusetts  made  various  transfers  of  its  rights  to  individuals 
and  associations,  and  thus  has  divested  itself  of  these  rights,  ex- 
cept the  right  to  be  represented  at  any  extinguishment  of  the 
Indian  title;  and  by  contracts  made  with  the  Indians  by  these 
various  assignees,  with  the  consent  of  Massachusetts,  New  York 
and  the  United  States,  this  preemptive  title  has  been  extinguished 
as  to  all  the  lands  except  those  of  the  Allegheny,  Cattaraugus,  and 
probably  about  1920  acres  of  the  Tuscarora  reservations.  The 
remainder  of  the  Tuscarora  lands,  4329  acres,  the  Tuscarora  nation 
owns  in  fee. 

The  Oneidas  own  400  acres  of  land  which  they  hold  in 
severalty. 

The  Cayugas  now  have  no  lands  in  the  State. 

The  Shinnecock  Indians  own  400  acres  on  Long  Island  in  fee. 
They  are  largely  a  mixed  race,  few  of  them  being  full  blood 
Indians. 

The  St.  Regis  Indians  have  14,030  acres  of  land  in  Franklin 
County,  the  title  to  which  is  in  the  State*,  and  the  right  of  occupancy 
and  possession  in  the  tribe. 

The  Onondaga  Indians  have  7300  acres  near  Syracuse ;  the  title 
to  which  is  in  the  State,  and  the  right  of  occupancy  and  possession 
in  the  tribe. 

The  Tonawandas  have  7548  acres  in  the  Counties  of  Erie  and 
Genesee  which  they  purchased,  and  the  title  to  which  is  now  in 
the  State  Comptroller  of  this  State  and  his  successors  in  office  in 
trust  for  the  tribe. 

The  Seneca  Indians  have  30,409  acres  on  the  Allegheny  reserva- 
tion and  21,080  acres  on  the  Cattaraugus  reservation,  the  title 
to  which  is  in  the  Seneca  nation,  subject  to  the  preemptive  right 
of  what  is  popularly  known  as  the  Ogden  Company,  upon  the 
extinguishment  of  the  Indian  title. 

The  foregoing  comprise  all  Indian  lands  in  the  State. 

The  only  claim  of  the  United  States  Government  is  that  as 
general  guardian  or  protector  of  all  Indians,  and  its  general  right 
to  make  treaties  with  them,  and  under  its  treaties  with  the  Senecas, 
no  disposition  of  their  lands  can  be  made  without  its  consent.      It 


7  Doc.  No.  26' 

is  therefore  impossible  for  either  the  State  of  New  York,  the 
Indians  themselves,  the  owners  of  the  preemptive  right,  or  all  three 
combined  to  dispose  of  these  lands  without  the  consent  of  the 
United  States.  The  extension,  therefore,  of  the  general  State 
laws,  and  jurisdiction  of  the  State  courts  over  the  Indians  would 
have  no  effect  upon  these  tribal  lands. 

Government  of  Indians  of  New  Yokk 

The  United  States,  first  treating  Indians  as  foreign  nations,  then 

as  dependent  nations,  within  its  borders,  made  treaties  with  them 

until  1871,  when  by  an  act  of  Congress  it  forbade  recognition  of 

them  as  an  independent  nation  with  whom  treaties  could  be  made. 

Act  of  March  3,  1871,  Chap.   120.     Sec.   2079,  Revised 
Statutes.     U.  'S.  v.  Kagama,  118  U.  S.  375. 

Prior  to  this,  the  only  treaties  made  by  the  United  States  with 
New  York  Indians  were  for  the  purpose  of  insuring  peace,  settling- 
boundary  lines,  and  guaranteeing  them  and  their  posterity  in  the 
possession  of  certain  lands,  or  consenting  to  the  disposition  of 
parts  thereof.  No  treaty  contains  any  provision  for  government 
of  the  Indians  except  that  in  the  treaties  of  1789  and  1795  with 
the  six  nations  provision  was  made  for  surrender  and  punishment 
in  cases  of  robbery,  murder,  etc. 

The  United  States  has  never  passed  any  laws  for  the  government 
of  Indians  in  New  York  except  such  as  are  of  general  application 
to  all  Indians,  and  there  appear  to  be  only  two  or  three  of  these. 
One  provides  the  method  by  which  contracts  made  by  an  Indian 
for  services  relating  to  claims  for  lands  and  moneys  due  from 
the  United  States  shall  be  made  (U.  S.  Stat.  Sec.  2103)  and 
another  is  an  amendment  to  the  Penal  Laws  (Chap.  321,  U.  S. 
Laws  of  1909)  which  provides  for  punishment  and  jurisdiction 
in  case  of  certain  crimes  of  Indians  against  the  person  or  property 
of  another  Indian  within  the  limits  of  any  reservation,  viz : 
murder,  manslaughter,  rape,  assault  with  intent  to  kill,  assault 
with  a  deadly  weapon,  arson,  burglary  and  larceny. 

This  statute  was  before  our  Court  of  Appeals  in  People  ex.  rel. 
Cusick  v.  Daly,  212  N.  Y.  183,  where  it  was  held  that  as  the 
Federal  Government  has  chosen  to  legislate  on  this  subject  it  con- 


Doc.  No.  26  8 

trolled  and  excluded  State  legislation  on  the  same  subject.  In 
this  case  the  court  seems  to  assume  "  that,  in  the  absence  of 
Federal  legislation,  the  State  has  most  ample  power  to  legislate 
for  the  Indians  within  its  borders."  This  is  undoubtedly  true 
because  the  United  States  Constitution  nowhere  prohibits  it  except 
as  to  treaties  and  regulations  of  commerce  with  the  Indians.  The 
only  other  restriction  is  the  right  claimed  by  the  Federal  govern- 
ment as  guardian  to  legislate  for  their  protection.  The  various 
State  courts  so  construe  the  rights  of  the  State,  as  witness  Farring- 
ton  v.  Wilson,  29  Wis.  383,  Smith  v.  Smith,  140  Wis.  599, 
holding  that  State  courts  have  jurisdiction  to  appoint  guardians 
of  Indians  though  belonging  to  a  distinct  tribe.  Also,  Stacy  and 
another  v.  La  Belle,  99  Wis.  520,  that  State  courts  have  jurisdic- 
tion of  a  contract  in  favor  of  a  white  man  against  an  Indian  be- 
longing to  a  tribe  and  a  particular  reservation.  This  last  case 
enumerates  the  cases  in  which  a  State  may  act  in  the  absence  of 
Federal  legislation.  See  also,  holding  the  same,  122  Ind.  541. 
(7  L.K.A.  782.) 

Our  courts  hold  that  where  jurisdiction  is  not  conferred  on 
peacemakers'  courts,  our  courts  have  jurisdiction. 

Terrence  v.  Gray,  165  A.  D.  636;  Matter  of  Printup,  121 
A.  D.  322 ;  Peters  v.  Tallchief,  121  A.  D.  309. 

Also  that  our  laws  of  descent  and  distribution  apply  to  Indians. 
Hatch  v.  Luckman,  155  A.  D.  765. 

Our  own  Indian  law  provides  that  State  courts  have  jurisdiction 
where  it  is  not  conferred  on  peacemakers'  courts.  Art.  2,  Section 
5.     Indian  Law. 

It  also  provides  that  Indians  are  liable  on  contracts  not  pro- 
hibited by  law,  but  immediately  forbids  any  action  on  a  cunt  tact 
against  any  Indian  of  tho  Seneca  or  Tonawanda  nation,  or  Onon- 
daga tribe,  though  making  no  such  provision  for  the  Tuscaroras, 
St.  Regis,  Shinnocock,  or  any  other  tribe. 

It  also  provides  that  the  State  laws  as  to  marriage,  annulment, 
and  divorce  apply  to  Indians,  and  that  the  State  courts  have  juris- 
diction ;  and  then  confers  these  powers  exclusively,  on  peace- 
makers' courts  of  the  Allegheny  and  Cattaraugus  reservations  only, 
probably  granting  these  unusual  powers  to  them  because  they  are 


9  Doc.  No.  26 

the  least  civilized  of  all  the  Indians  in  the  State.  Even  the  Tona- 
wandas  who  have  peacemakers'  courts,  have  no  jurisdiction  over 
marriage  and  divorce,  and  none  of  the  other  tribes  have  any  kind 
of  courts.  While  no  State  law  has  provided  for  Surrogates'  conns 
among  them,  the  Senecas  of  the  Cattaraugus  and  Allegheny  reser- 
vations have  erected  Surrogates'  courts  which  probate  wills  and  dis- 
tribute estates.  The  other  laws  are  of  minor  importance,  and 
except  for  abolishing  their  so-called  courts  would  not  be  interfered 
with  by  the  amendment  proposed.  The  general  laws  would  not 
interfere  in  any  way  with  tribal  relations,  nor  management  of 
tribal  affairs. 

That  the  State  has  power  to  govern  Indians  was  decided  many 
years  ago  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  in  construing 
a  New  York  statute  of  March  31,  1821,  providing  for  removal 
of  persons  from  Indian  lands. 

The  court  says :  "  The  statute  in  question  is  a  police  regulation 
for  the  protection  of  the  Indians  from  intrusion  of  the  white 
people,  and  to  preserve  the  peace.  It  is  the  dictate  of  a  prudent 
and  just  policy.  Notwithstanding  the  peculiar  relations  which 
these  Indian  nations  hold  to  the  government  of  the  United  States, 
the  State  of  New  York  had  the  power  of  a  sovereign  over  their 
persons  and  property  so  far  as  it  was  necessary  to  preserve  the 
peace  of  the  commonwealth,  and  protect  these  feeble  and  helpless 
bands  from  imposition  and  intrusion.  The  power  of  a  State  to 
make  such  regulations  to  preserve  the  peace  of  the  community 
is  absolute,  and  has  never  been  surrendered."  People  v.  Dibble, 
21  Howard  (U.  S.)   366-371. 

The  United  States  Supreme  Court  seems  to  have  settled  the 
respective  powers  of  the  Federal  and  State  courts  and  the  power 
of  a  State  court  to  act  in  the  absence  of  Federal  legislation  in 
The  Minnesota  Kate  Cases,  230  U.  S.  352  et  seq. 

At  page  399,  the  Court  says: 

"  It  has  repeatedly  been  declared  by  this  Court  that  as  to  those 
subjects  which  require  a  general  system  or  uniformity  of  regula- 
tion the  power  of  Congress  is  exclusive.  In  other  matters,  ad- 
mitting of  diversity  of  treatment  according  to  the  special  require- 
ments of  local  conditions,  the  States  may  act  within  their  respective 
jurisdictions  until  Congress  sees  fit  to  act;  and  when  Congress 
does  act,  the  exercise  of  its  authority  overrides  all  conflicting  State 


Doc.  No.  26  10 

legislation."  Aud  at  page  402,  after  stating  the  nature  of  the 
legislation  necessarily  reserved  exclusively  to  Congress,  the  Court 
farther  says, 

"  But  within  these  limitations  there  necessarily  remains  to  the 
States,  until  Congress  acts,  a  wide  range  for  the  permissible  exer- 
cise of  power  appropriate  to  their  territorial  jurisdiction  although 
interstate  commerce  may  be  affected.  It  extends  to  these  matters 
of  a  local  nature  as  to  which  it  is  impossible  to  derive  from  the 
constitutional  grant  an  intention  that  they  should  go  uncontrolled 
pending  Federal  intervention."  *  *  *  *  "  Where  the  subject 
is  peculiarly  one  of  local  concern,  and  from  its  nature  belongs 
to  the  class  with  which  the  State  appropriately  deals  in  making 
reasonable  provision  for  local  needs,  it  cannot  be  regarded  as  left 
to  the  unrestrained  will  of  individuals  because  Congress  has  not 
acted,  although  it  may  have  such  a  relation  to  interstate  commerce 
as  to  be  within  the  reach  of  the  Federal  power.  In  such  case. 
Congress  must  be  the  judge  of  the  necessity  of  Federal  action." 

For  the  Committee, 

JAMES  P.  LINDSAY. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  27 


MEMORIAL  PRESENTED  BY  THE  SOCIETY  OF  TAM- 
MANY OR  COLUMBIAN  ORDER  TO  THE  DELEGATES 
OF  THE  CONSTITUTIONAL  CONVENTION  OF  THE 
STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


June  16,  1915 

Whereas,  There  appear  to  be,  and  in  fact  there  are,  certain  in- 
terests and  influences  at  work  to  alter,  subvert  and  abridge  those 
fundamental  principles  of  free  government  which  by  reason  of 
the  sacrifices  of  our  forefathers  are  the  heritage  and  birthright 
of  our  people ;  and 

Whereas,  For  more  than  a  century  the  historic  Society  of  Tam- 
many or  Columbian  Order  has  been  the  constant  defender  and 
champion  of  the  masses. 

Now,  therefore,  we,  the  Council  of  Sachems  of  that  ancient 
and  patriotic  society  and  in  pursuance  of  the  traditional  policy 
of  the  Columbian  Order,  do  respectfully  submit  this  memorial. 

First.  We  denounce,  as  opposed  to  and  in  contravention  of  the 
doctrines  of  liberty  enunciated  in  the  Charter  of  Liberties  and 
Privileges  drafted  by  the  first  Colonial  Assembly  of  this  State 
in  1683,  all  attempts  to  tamper  with  or  change  the  right  of  trial 
by  jury  as  it  now  exists.  When,  in  the  days  preceding  the  forma- 
tion of  this  Republic,  the  representatives  of  the  people  of  the 
Colony  of  New  York  enacted  that  "All  TRYALS  shall  be  by  the 


Doc.  Xo.  27  2 

verdict  of  twelve  men,  and  as  near  as  may  be  peers  or  equals  and 
of  the  neighborhood  and  in  the  county  Shire  or  Division  where 
the  fact  shall  arise  or  grow  Whether  the  same  be  by  indictment 
infermacon  declaration  or  otherwise  against  the  person  offender 
or  defendant,"  they  laid  down  a  guarantee  of  freedom  wrung  by 
their  forebears  from  a  despot  at  a  cost  too  great  for  calculation. 

Yet  there  are  those  intrusted  with  the  task  of  preserving  unim- 
paired these  treasured  principles,  who  would,  overnight,  substitute 
for  them  the  theoretic  notions  of  unpatriotic  legal  reformers, 
forgetting  the  tremendous  price  so  paid  for  the  privilege  of  trial 
by  common-law  jury  —  the  most  precious  gem  in  the  diadem  of 
liberty. 

Second.  The  power  of  the  people  to  elect  those  who  are  to  sit 
in  judgment  upon  their  liberty  and  their  property  rights  should 
never  be  abrogated ;  least  of  all  should  that  power  be  placed  in  the 
hands  of  a  privileged  and  exclusive  coterie,  whether  composed 
of  lawyers  or  laymen. 

In  the  undisguised  effort  being  made  to  deprive  our  citizens 
of  the  right  to  be  judged  by  judges  of  their  own  selection,  we 
perceive  an  inevitable  return  to  the  days  of  Jeffreys  —  those 
black  and  despairing  times  when  a  favored  sycophant  passed 
upon  the  life  and  liberty  of  the  masses,  at  the  behest  of  the  power 
which  had  selected  him  to  wreak  its  private  vengeance.  Sub- 
stitute for  a  Jeffreys  an  unscrupulous  attorney  selected  by  an 
insidious  and  powerful  combination  of  money  and  monopoly,  the 
greatest  menace  of  modern  society,  and  you  have  a  possibility  of 
injustice  and  tyranny  which  will  all  too  soon  ripen  into  a  prob- 
ability. The  power  of  selecting  judges  should  never  be  placed 
in  the  hands  other  than  those  of  the  people  themselves.  There- 
fore, and  in  no  uncertain  terms,  we  decry  the  effort  to  bring 
about  the  appointment  rather  than  the  election  of  judges.  The 
influences  which  would  tamper  with  our  jury  most  not  be  per- 
mitted to  steal  our  judiciary  too. 

Third.  "  Taxation  without  representation  "  still  exists  in  this 
otherwise  Excelsior  State.  We  demand  that  you  accord  to  the 
tax-burdened  city  of  New  York  some  measure  of  relief  from  its 
rural  taxmasters;  that  our  metropolis  with  its  population  of 
5,000,000  receive  that  fair  and  just  proportion  of  representation 


3  Doc.  No.  27 

in  the  State  Legislature  to  which  its  share  of  the  task  of  maintain- 
ing the  State  entitles  it. 

This  city  of  New  York  is  and  of  right  ought  to  be  the  free 
and  untrammeled  metropolis  of  the  western  world;  and  it  is  your 
duty  to  accord  and  grant  it  an  unequivocal  home  rule  so  that  we 
shall  not  be  at  the  mercy  of  rural  communities,  who  do  not 
and  in  the  nature  of  things  cannot  understand  what  is  essential 
and  necessary  for  its  growth  and  welfare. 
John  F.  Ahearn, 

Asa  Bird  Gardiner,  Charles  F.  Murphy, 

Wauhope  Lynn,  John  J.  Scannell, 

George  W.  Plunkitt,  Thomas  Darlington, 

Henry  W.  Unger,  George  W.  Loft, 

William  Dalton,  Thomas  F.  McAvoy, 

Louis  F.  Haffen,  Edward  0.  Sheeiiy, 

Council  of  Sachems  of  the  Society  of  Tammany 
or  Columbian  Order. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN   CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  28 


REPORT  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  CONSERVATION  OF 
NATURAL  RESOURCES  RELATIVE  TO  THE  SEVERAL 
PROPOSED  AMENDMENTS 


July  30,  1915 

Mr.  Dow,  from  the  Committee  on  Conservation,  to  which  was 
referred  several  proposed  amendments  in  relation  to  conservation 
of  forest  lands,  reports  by  proposed  amendment  entitled  "  Pro- 
posed constitutional  amendment  to  insert  in  the  Constitution  a 
new  article  in  relation  to  the  conservation  of  natural  resources  " 
(Int.  ]STo.  70S),  which  was  read  twice  and  said  committee  reports 
in  favor  of  the  passage  of  the  same,  which  report  was  agreed  to, 
and  said  proposition  ordered  printed  and  referred  to  the  Com- 
mittee of  the  Whole. 

The  Committee  on  Conservation  of  Natural  Eesources  herewith 
presents  the  following  reasons  in  support  of  its  report: 

The  Committee  was  called  upon  to  consider  two  basic  questions : 
First,  the  determination  of  the  policy  of  the  State  in  respect  to 
the  preservation  of  its  Forest  Preserve;  and  second,  the  admin- 
istration of  all  the  natural  resources  of  the  State,  free  from  politi- 
cal interference. 

In  respect  to  both  of  these  fundamental  propositions  and  to  the 


Doc.  No.  28  2 

numerous  incidental  propositions  that  have  been  presented  to  it, 
the  Committee  has  held  public  hearings  and  executive  sessions; 
has  fully  considered  all  amendments  referred  to  it,  and  all  sugges- 
tions made  to  it ;  and,  after  thorough  deliberation,  has  reached  the 
conclusions  embodied  in  its  report. 

The  propositions  submitted  to  the  Committee  on  Conservation, 
and  from  which  they  have  drawn  suggestions,  were  as  follows : 

Pr.  No.   10,  Int.  No.   10,  proposed  by  C.  H.  Young. 

Pr.  No.  25,  Int.  No.  25,  proposed  by  J.    S.    Whipple, 

Pr.  No.   37,  Int.  No.   37,  proposed  by  R.  B.  Smith. 

Pr.  No.   71,  Int.  No.   71,  proposed  by  C.  H.  Young. 

Pr.  No.  84,  Int.  No.   84,  proposed  by  E.  N.   Smith. 

Pr.  No.   129,  Int.  No.   129,  proposed  by  H.  L.  Austin. 

Pr.  No.   154,  Int.  No.   154,  proposed  by  W.  B.  Dunlap. 

Pr.  No.  208,  Int.  No.  207,  proposed  by  A.   P.   McKean. 

Pr.  No.  220,  Int.  No.  219,  proposed  by  G.  H.  Bunce. 

Pr.  Nos.  128-247,  Int.  No,  128,  proposed  by  H.  L.  Austin. 

Pr.  No.  299,  Int.  No.  295,  proposed  by  W.    P.    Bannister. 

Pr.  No.   316,  Int.  No.   312,  proposed  by  A.  J.  Baldwin. 

Pr.  No.   375,  Int.  No.   370,  proposed  by  Charles  M.  Dow. 

Pr.  No.   382,  Int.  No.   375,  proposed  by  A.  J.  Baldwin. 

Pr.  No,  445,  Int.  No,  433,  proposed  by  Ferris  J.  Meigs. 

Pr.  No.  450,  Int.  No.  438,  proposed  by  G.   E.   Greene. 

Pr.  No.  492,  Int.  No.  480,  proposed  by  Charles  M.  Dow. 

Pr.  No.   584,  Int.  No.   569,  proposed  by  E.   M.    Angell. 

Pr.  No.   585,  Int.  No.   570,  proposed  by  E.  M.  Angell. 

Pr.  No.   586,  Int.  No.   571,  proposed  by  E.  M.  Angell. 

Pr.  No.   647,  Int.  No.   631,  proposed  by  T.  A.  Leary. 

The  Forest  Preserve. —  As  to  the  policy  of  the  State  in  respect 
to  the  Forest  Preserve,  your  Committee  adopts  the  following  lan- 
guage of  the  report  of  David  McClure  for  the  Committee  on  For- 
est Preserves,  made  to  the  last  Constitutional  Convention,  under 
date  of  August  23,  1894,  and  reading  in  part  as  follows: 

"  That  your  Committee  has  reached  the  conclusion  that  it  is 
necessary  for  the  health,  safety  and  general  advantage1  of  the  peo- 
ple of  the  State  that  the  forest  lands  now  owned  and  hereafter 
acquired  by  the  State,  and  the  timber  on  sneh  lands,  should  be 
preserved  intact  as  forest  preserves  and  not  under  any  circum- 
stances be  sold." 


3  Doc.  No.  28 

Your  Committee  thus  reports  the  present  language  of  section 
seven  of  article  seven  of  the  Constitution  relating  to  the  preserva- 
tion of  the  Forest  Preserve  as  wild  forest  lands,  with  the  exceptions 
that  it  recommends  that  the  Department  of  Conservation  be  "  em- 
powered to  reforest  lands  in  the  Forest  Preserve,  to  construct  fire 
trails  thereon,  and  to  remove  dead  trees  and  dead  timber  there- 
from for  purposes  of  reforestation  and  fire  protection  solely;  but 
shall  not  sell  the  same".  This  exception,  in  the  opinion  of  the 
Committee,  will  prepare  for  reforestation  and  more  adequately 
protect  the  State  forests  from  destruction  by  fire. 

Administration. —  In  determining  the  question  of  administra- 
tion, your  Committee  was  called  upon  to  deal  with  considerations 
which  are  peculiar  to  the  question  of  conservation.  It  seemed 
necessary  that  your  Committee  should  provide  for  continuity  of 
policy  and  freedom  from  political  control,  which  in  their  opinion 
is  indispensable  to  proper  management  of  the  Forest  Preserve. 
They  deemed  that  these  ends  could  best  be  secured  by  an  unpaid 
board  which,  from  the  nature  of  the  work  and  the  opportunity  for 
State  service  it  offers,  would  attract  to  it  men  of  a  type  whose  serv- 
ices no  salary  could  secure.  Such  a  board  will  be  deliberative 
in  function,  and  will  shape  the  policy  of  administering  the  natural 
resources  of  the  State,  in  response  to  public  sentiment,  and  for  the 
best  interests  of  the  State  as  a  whole. 

By  appointing  commissioners  for  overlapping  terms  of  nine 
years,  and  providing  that  they  can  only  be  removed  by  the  Gover- 
nor on  charges,  permanency  of  personnel  and  continuity  of  policy 
are  secured. 

By  specifying  that  each  judicial  district  in  the  State  shall  be 
represented  on  this  board,  every  portion  of  the  State  has  its  spokes- 
man, and  as  a  consequence,  the  people  as  a  whole  will  feel  that 
their  voice  may  be  heard,  and  thus  public  confidence  and  support 
will  be  better  guaranteed. 

Extensive  reforestation  is  provided  for,  in  order  that  the  large 
tracts  of  State-owned  land,  now  bare,  may  be  reclothed  with  for- 
ests, to  the  improvement  of  the  water  holding  capacity  of  the  soil 
and  the  enhancement  of  the  Forest  Preserve  as  park  and  recreation 
ground. 

The  practice  of  forestry  throughout  the  State  is  encouraged  and 


Doc.  No.  28  4 

the  department  given  discretionary  power  to  promote  forest  man- 
agement upon  the  large  areas  unsuited  to  agriculture. 

The  purchase  of  additional  lands  within  the  Blue  Lines  which 
bound  the  forest  parks  within  the  Forest  Preserve,  is  not  only  rec- 
ommended, but  a  plan  for  securing  funds  for  such  purchases  is 
provided.  Systematic  purchasing  of  lands  within  the  Blue  Lines 
would  consolidate  the  present  holdings,  making  administration 
more  economical,  and  at  the  same  time,  secure  control  of  lands 
upon  whose  forest  cover  depends  the  regular  flow  of  our  most  im- 
portant streams,  and  insure  perpetuation  of  the  water  supply  of 
the  State  and  its  municipalities. 

By  making  it  possible,  if  deemed  advisable,  to  extend  the  fire 
protection  system  to  include  the  entire  State,  your  Committee  feels 
that  it  is  providing  for  the  safety  of  forest  lands.  Most  sections 
of  the  State  have  suffered  heavily  in  the  past  from  forest  fires 
through  lack  of  an  efficient  protective  organization.  In  such 
cases,  this  department  may,  at  the  solicitation  of  citizens  or  acting 
upon  its  own  discretion,  install  a  local  State  fire  warden  for  the 
purpose  of  preventing  and  suppressing  such  forest  fires. 

Concerning  the  regulatory  powers  of  this  department,  your 
Committee  deems  it  advisable  to  empower  it  to  enact  the  necessary 
rules  and  regulations  concerning  fish,  game,  birds,  shellfish  and 
Crustacea,  subject  to  the  veto  of  the  Governor.  This  power  should 
not  only  lighten  the  load  of  the  Legislature  to  a  considerable  ex- 
tent, but  also  result  in  less  confusion  and  better  co-ordination  of 
the  fish  and  game  laws,  with  increased  efficiency  and  equity. 

Regarding  the  personnel,  civil  service  regulations  are  to  be  en- 
forced, with  the  exception  of  the  superintendent,  emergency  em- 
ployees and  laborers. 

The  existing  provision  permitting  the  use  of  three  per  cent,  of 
the  Forest  Preserve  for  water  storage  purposes  is  retained  with- 
out any  change  whatever,  as  is  the  provision  that  any  citizen 
may  bring  an  action  for  violations  of  the  provisions  of  this  article 
(the  final  clause  of  section  seven). 

To  avoid  inflicting  hardships  upon  communities  and  individ- 
uals who  have  for  years  occupied  lands  now  belonging  to  the  State, 
the  Department  of  Conservation  is  given  discretionary  power  to 
issue  licenses  to  occupants  of  that  class.    These  licenses  are  revoca- 


5  Doc.  No.  28 

ble  and  are  limited  to  cases  where  occupancy  commenced  before 
December  1,  1909,  and  to  permanent  residents. 

The  final  change  to  be  mentioned  is  the  one  whereby  the  City  of 
New  York  may  use  for  water  supply  purposes  three  small  speci- 
fied tracts  owned  by  the  State  in  Greene  and  Ulster  counties.  Such 
use  is  felt  to  be  of  necessity  to  the  city,  and  by  clearly  specifying 
the  parcels  in  question,  no  extensive  easements  are  granted. 
(Signed)  : 

1.  Charles  M.  Dow 

Chairman 

2.  Edward  1ST.  Smith 

3.  George  Clinton 

4.  Louis  Marshall 
5. 

6.  Rush  Rhees 

(Reserving  right  to  dissent  to  mandatory  appro- 
priation.) 

7.  Olin  H.  Landreth 

(Reserving  the  right  to  dissent  to  the  limitations 
placed  on  the  powers  of  the  Commission.) 

8.  Ferris  J.  Meigs 

(Except  for  the  too  narrow  limitations  placed  on 
some  of  the  discretionary  powers  of  the  depart- 
ment, I  approve.) 

9.  H.  Leroy  Austin 

(But  dissenting  as  to  the  nine-headed  commission 
and  mandatory  appropriation,  for  reasons  which 
I  will  state.) 

10.  Wm.  P.  Bannister 

(Reserving  right  to  dissent  to  mandatory  appropri- 
ation. ) 

11.  Edward  M.  Angell 

(Being  in  favor,  however,  of  broader  powers  in  the 
Commission.) 

12.  W.  Barlow  Dunlap 

13.  Arthur  J.  Baldwin 

(Reserving  the  right  to  dissent  to  mandatory  ap- 
propriations.) 


Doc.  No.  28  6 

14.  M.  J.  O'Brien 

15.  Timothy  A.  Leahy 

16.  George  A.  Blattvelt 

(Reserving  right  to  dissent.) 

17.  John  G.  Saxe 

The  majority  report  is  signed  by  all  the  members  of  the  Com- 
mittee, except  Mr.  Whipple. 

Messrs.  Dow,  Smith,  Clinton,  Marshall,  Dunlap,  O'Brien, 
Leary,  and  Saxe  sign  without  restriction. 

Messrs.  Landreth,  Meigs  and  Angell  reserve  the  right  to  dis- 
sent as  to  the  limitations  placed  upon  the  powers  of  the  depart- 
ment. 

Messrs,  Rhees,  Bannister,  Austin  and  Baldwin  reserve  the  right 
to  dissent  from  the  provision  for  a  mandatory  appropriation,  and 
Mr.  Austin  also  from  the  form  of  administration. 


MAJORITY  REPORT 

Mr.  Angell  presented  the  following  majority  report: 

SUPPLEMENTAL   STATEMENT    RELATING    TO    THE 
RESTRICTIONS  PLACED   ON   THE  DISCRETION- 
ARY POWER  OF  THE  CONSERVATION  DEPART- 
MENT AS  PROPOSED  BY  THE  COMMITTEE   ON 
CONSERVATION  OF  NATURAL  RESOURCES 
The  undersigned  members  of  the  Committee  on  Conservation  of 
Natural  Resources,  while  in  hearty  accord  with  all  the  provisions 
of  the  majority  report,  disagree  with  the  conclusion  of  the  majority 
of  the  Committee  that  none  of  the  restrictions  of  use  in  the  present 
Constitution  should  be  relaxed.   We  believe  that  the  limitations  in 
the  majority  report  are  too  restricting  in  their  effect  upon  the 
operations  and  do  not  offer  an  opportunity  for  the  proper  develop- 
ment of  the  State's  natural  resources. 

The  Committee  has  reported  a  plan  for  the  organization  of  the 
department  along  lines  which  should  insure  continuity  of  purpose, 
free  from  partisan  control,  by  men  of  high  character,  whose  sole 
purpose  will  be  to  serve  the  best  interests  of  the  State  in  the 
preservation,  the  development  and  enhancement  in  value  of  its 


7  Doc.  No.  28 

natural  resources.  We  believe  that  they  should  be  entrusted  by 
the  people  with  the  duty  and  the  power  to  work  out  the  problems 
before  them,  and  to  that  end  they  should  be  given  greater  latitude 
under  the  Constitution  —  a  latitude  which  will  enable  them  to 
exercise  their  discretion  in  many  particulars  upon  important 
questions  of  policy.  The  majority  seem  to  believe  in  prohibition 
of  use.  We  believe  in  protection  and  conservation,  and  conserva- 
tion is  not  prohibition.  We  favor  making  provisions  in  the  Con- 
stitution which  will  permit,  under  rules  and  regulations  to  be  fixed 
by  the  Conservation  Department,  the  following: 

I.  The  building  of  highways  in  the  Forest  Preserve. 

II.  The  leasing  of  camp  sites  of  limited  area  for  limited  periods 
on  restricted  portions  of  the  Forest  Preserve. 

III.  The  sale  by  the  State  of  lands  in  the  Forest  Preserve  out- 
side of  the  Adirondack  and  Catskill  parks,  except  the  land  con- 
tiguous thereto  and  the  islands  in  and  the  lands  adjacent  to 
Lake  George. 

IV.  The  classification  of  the  lands  of  the  State  in  the  Adiron- 
dack and  Catskill  parks  into  two  areas,  one  of  which  shall  be 
forever  held  as  wild  forest  lands,  and  which  shall  include  the  lands 
upon  the  mountain  tops  and  the  lands  in  and  around  the  lakes 
and  major  streams,  and  such  other  lands  as  for  any  reason  the 
Commission  shall  determine  should  be  so  classified ;  and  the  second 
area  to  include  all  the  other  lands  of  the  State  within  said  parks, 
with  a  provision  that  the  Conservation  Department  may  cut,  sell, 
and  remove  any  part  of  the  timber  thereon  which  is  mature  or 
detrimental  to  forest  growth,  in  accordance  with  the  principles  of 
scientific  forestry,  and  for  the  purpose  of  increasing  the  growth 
of  the  forests.  Such  lands,  however,  to  be  forever  kept  as  forest 
lands  and  the  forest  cover  thereon  to  be  maintained  and  per- 
petuated. 

Our  reasons  for  desiring  to  incorporate  the  foregoing  provisions 
in  the  Constitution  are  as  follows : 

I.  Under  the  provisions  of  the  present  Constitution  and  under 
the  proposed  amendment  proposed  by  the  majority  of  the  Com- 
mittee it  is  impossible  to  build  highways  in  the  Adirondacks  or 
Catskills  through  or  upon  the  lands  of  the  State,  These  lands  are 
owned  by  the  people  and  should  be  made  accessible  to  them  so  that 


Doc.  No.  28  8 

they  may  more  easily  go  there  for  health  and  recreation.  The 
forests  should  not  be  locked  from  access  to  the  majority  of  the 
people  of  the  State.  Such  highways  would,  in  addition,  furnish 
the  best  possible  fire  protection  because  they  would  be  broad  fire 
lanes  and  besides  would  enable  the  forest  rangers  quickly  to  reach 
the  locality  of  the  fire  and  extinguish  it  before  it  has  acquired 
headway. 

II.  The  leasing  of  camp  sites  should  be  permitted  for  largely 
the  same  reasons.  The  Adirondacks  and  Catskills  should  be- 
opened  to  the  use  of  the  people  of  the  State  by  leasing  to  them 
camp  sites  of  a  limited  area  and  for  a  limited  time.  This  would 
not  only  be  a  means  of  substantial  revenue  to  the  State  but  would 
furnish  during  the  time  most  needed  a  fire  fighting  force.  Fires 
are  less  frequent  where  camps  are  occupied,  for  camp  site  lessees 
would  become  interested  in  seeing  that  no  fires  devastated  their 
camps,  and  they  would  thereby  furnish  a  great  protection  to  the 
property  of  the  State. 

III.  The  State  owns  about  250,000  acres  outside  the  Adiron- 
dack and  Catskill  parks  in  isolated  areas  where  they  serve  no 
useful  purpose  but  are  a  constant  and  increasing  expense  to  the 
State.  The  Conservation  Commission  and  practically  every  or- 
ganization and  individual  in  the  State  interested  in  this  subject, 
have,  for  many  years,  advocated  the  sale  of  these  lands  and  the 
devotion  of  the  proceeds,  estimated  to  be  not  less  than  $1,000,000, 
to  the  purchase  of  other  lands  within  the  Adirondack  and  Catskill 
parks. 

IV.  Lands  in  the  Adirondack  and  Catskill  parks  should  be 
classified  by  the  Conservation  Department  into  areas  as  above  out- 
lined, one  of  which  should  be  held  as  wild  forest  land,  and  the 
other  as  utilization  forests. 

The  State  owns  approximately,  1,800,000  acres  in  the  Forest 
Preserve,  an  area  larger  than  the  State  of  Delaware  and  about 
half  the  size  of  Connecticut.  It  is  fair  to  say  thai  1,250,000  acres 
of  this  area  are  covered  by  heavy  forest  growth.  The  average 
annual  growth  is  estimated  by  competent  authority  to  be  200  feet 
per  acre,  or  an  aggregate  annual  wood  crop  of  250,000.000  feet  of 
lumber,  worth  approximately  $1,000,000.  This  is  now  an  abso- 
lute economic  loss  to  the  State,  for  an  amount  equal  to  the  annual 


9  Doc.  No.  28 

growth  annually  falls  from  decay  and  its  value  is  gone  forever. 
Under  proper  forest  management  the  annual  growth  could  be 
taken  each  year  and  still  the  necessary  forest  cover  maintained. 
This  would  mean  the  removal  annually  of  not  over  two  per  cent,  of 
the  trees  standing  on  the  lands.  The  growth  and  quantity  of  forest 
trees  would  be  increased,  and  the  value  of  the  Forest  Preserve 
for  water  storage  purposes  be  undiminished.  If  the  part  to  be  set 
aside  in  the  first  area  to  be  forever  held  as  wild  lands  on  which 
no  cutting  should  be  allowed,  be  estimated  at  one-third  to  one-half 
of  the  wThole  area  the  above  estimate  would  be  decreased  to  $500,- 
000  —  the  amount  asked  for  annually  by  the  Committee.  The 
carrying  charges  of  the  Forest  Preserve  are  not  less  than  $365,000. 
exclusive  of  the  interest  on  the  amounts  paid  by  the  State  for  these 
lands. 

The  Conservation  Department  has  for  years  advocated  a  change 
in  the  Constitution  which  would  make  unnecessary  this  vast 
economic  waste.  The  platform  of  the  Republican  and  Demo- 
cratic parties  for  the  year  1914,  upon  which  platforms  all  the 
delegates  to  this  Convention  were  elected,  demanded  a  change. 
The  Camp  Fire  Club  of  America,  The  Association  for  the  Pro- 
tection of  the  Adirondacks,  the  Empire  State  Forest  Products 
Association,  the  Committee  of  Engineers,  representing  national 
and  local  professional  engineering  societies,  and  many  other  asso- 
ciations and  individuals  having  knowledge  of  the  subject,  and  no 
personal  interest,  have  advised  a  procedure  similar  to  that  here 
advocated.  The  Legislature  of  the  State  at  its  last  two  sessions 
has  passed  a  concurrent  resolution  as  a  proposed  constitutional 
amendment,  as  follows : 

"  The  prohibition  of  section  seven  shall  not  prevent  the  cutting 
or  removal  of  mature,  dead,  or  fallen  timber  or  trees  detrimental 
to  forest  growth,  on  lands  constituting  the  Forest  Preserve,  nor  the 
leasing  of  camp  sites  and  the  construction  of  roads  and  trails  nec- 
essary for  protection  against  fire,  and  for  ingress  and  exit.'  The 
Legislature  may  authorize  the  sale  of  lands  outside  the  limits 
of  the  Adirondack  park  and  the  Catskill  park  as  such  parks  are 
now  established  by  law.  The  proceeds  of  such  sales  of  lands  shall 
be  set  apart  in  a  separate  fund  and  used  only  for  the  purchase  of 
lands  or  for  reforestation  in  such  parks." 

The  third  annual  report  of  the  Conservation  Commission  for 
the  year  1913  says:     "  Nearly  all  the  merchantable  material  in  a 


Doc.  No.  28  10 

forest  is  contained  in  a  few  of  the  larger  trees.  The  larger  trees 
are  but  a  small  proportion  of  the  whole  stand,  therefore,  their  re- 
moval does  not  injure  the  forest  cover.  The  purpose  could  be 
best  accomplished  by  classifying  the  Preserve  into  areas  which 
should  be  maintained  as  protective  forest  and  into  other  areas 
which  could  be  used  for  wood  production.  The  former  would  in- 
clude mountain  tops,  steep  slopes,  or  other  places  where  it  might 
be  difficult  to  maintain  the  forest  cover,  and  which  should  not 
therefore  be  lumbered.  The  latter  would  include  the  lower  and 
more  level  sections  where  operations  could  be  profitably  conducted 
without  injuring  the  forest  cover,  leaving,  however,  belts  around 
lakes  and  other  places  where  the  aesthetic  or  camping  interest  was 
more  important  than  the  commercial." 

This  method  also  has  the  endorsement  of  Henry  D.  Graves, 
Chief  Forester  of  the  national  preserve,  and  an  authority  of  the 
highest  standing,  who  in  a  letter  to  the  chairman  of  the  Conserva- 
tion Commission  under  date  of  July  18,  1015,  wrote  in  part  as 
follows : 

"  Undoubtedly  considerable  parts  of  the  Adirondack  Preserve 
should  be  retained  as  pristine  forests  for  the  recreation  and  es- 
thetic enjoyment  of  the  people.  I  believe,  however,  that  it  would 
be  equally  unfortunate  for  the  Constitution  to  prevent  the  people 
of  the  State  from  carrying  out,  after  expert  advice  and  public 
consideration,  a  policy  of  practical  forest  management  on  certain 
parts  of  the  Adirondack  lands  or  any  other  lands  owned  by  the 
State  where  it  is  determined  to  be  the  highest  use  which  can  be 
made  of  that  particular  portion  of  the  public  holdings." 

This  is  likewise  the  method  proposed  by  the  head  of  the  New 
York  State  Forestry  colleges  at  Syracuse  and  Cornell  in  numer- 
ous letters,  and  in  testimony  before  the  committee  at  its  public 
hearings.  It  is  also  the  method  by  which  the  Japanese  govern- 
ment manages  its  forests,  as  stated  by  Mr.  Nokai,  a  director  of 
the  natural  forests  of  Japan,  now  on  a  visit  to  this  country. 

The  last  Democratic  State  platform,  adopted  in  the  year  1914, 
contains  the  following  language: 

"  The  Constitution,  in  relation  to  the  preservation  of  forests, 
should  be  so  amended  as  to  permit  a  profit  to  the  State,  to  be  de- 
rived from  the  scientific  preservation  and  cultivation  of  our  forest 
lands,  at  the  same  time  protecting  them  against  exploitation  by 
private  interests." 


11  Doc.  No.  28 

The  Kepublican  State  platform,  adopted  at  the  time  the  Re- 
publican delegates-at-large  to  this  Convention  were  nominated, 
contains  the  following  upon  this  subject: 

"  We  favor  conservation  and  utilization  of  the  State's  forests 
and  waters  under  conditions  which  will  safeguard  the  rights  and 
interests  of  the  State.  The  holdings  by  the  State  of  forest  lands 
should  be  enlarged  and  adequately  protected  against  fire  and 
waste." 

Gilford  Pinchot  in  a  letter  to  the  Chairman  of  this  Committee 
under  date  of  July  7,  1915,  wrote  in  part  as  follows: 

"  In  am  in  favor  of  a  constitutional  provision  which  will  permit 
the  cutting  of  timber,  not  only  dead  and  down,  but  mature  and 
ripe,  in  the  Adirondacks,  as  perhaps  you  know,  and  I  am  enclosing 
herewith  a  report  made  to  the  Camp  Fire  Club  in  1911,  which 
deals  with  the  matter." 

The  Empire  State  Forest  Products  Association,  at  a  meeting 
held  in  Utica  November  12,  1914,  recommended  that — "The 
Constitution  should  be  so  amended  that  the  Legislature  may  pro- 
vide: 

(1)  For  the  sale  of  mature,  dead  and  down  timber  being  and 
standing  in  the  Forest  Preserve,  as  now  or  hereafter  constituted, 
and  for  the  removal  of  timber  so  sold  in  accordance  with  the  prin- 
ciples of  scientific  forestry. 

(2)  To  sell  the  lands  in  the  Forest  Preserve  outside  the  Adi- 
rondack and  Catskill  Parks. 

(3)  To  lease  camp  and  cottage  sites  in  the  Forest  Preserve. 

(4)  To  provide  for  the  construction  of  roads,  trails  and  fire 
lines  or  lanes  in  the  Forest  Preserve. 

(5)  To  set  apart  the  proceeds  of  the  sales  of  lands  and  all 
other  net  revenue  from  the  Forest  Preserve  in  a  fund,  to  be  used 
only  for  the  purchase  of  lands  in  the  Adirondack  and  Catskill 
Parks,  for  the  reforesting  of  lands  owned  by  the  State  in  said 
Parks  and  for  such  other  purposes  for  the  benefit  of  the  Forests 
in  said  Parks  as  the  Conservation  Commission  shall  provide. 

(6)  To  raise  funds  sufficient  to  continue  the  acquisition  of 
forest  lands  and  lands  suitable  for  growing  forests  not  belonging 
to  the  State  within  the  Adirondack  and  Catskill  Parks." 

The  Association  for  the  Protection  of  the  Adirondacks,   and 


Doc.  No.  28  12 

the  Camp  Fire  Club  of  America,  by  their  sub-committees,  at  a 
joint  meeting  held  in  New  York  City  July  16,  1914,  voted  in 
favor  of  the  following  proposed  amendment  to  the  Constitution: 

"  The  prohibition  of  Section  7  shall  not  prevent  the  cutting  or 
removal  of  [mature]  dead  or  fallen  timber  or  trees,  detrimental 
to  forest  growth  on  lands  constituting  the  Forest  Preserve,  nor 
the  leasing  of  camp  sites,  nor  the  construction  of  roads  and  trails 
necessary  for  protection  against  fire  and  for  ingress,  and  egress. 
The  Legislature  may  authorize  the  sale  of  lands  outside  the  limits 
of  the  Adirondack  Park  and  of  the  Catskill  Park  as  such  Parks 
are  now  established  by  law." 

In  an  editorial  in  the  July,  1915,  number  of  "American 
Forestry  ",  the  official  organ  of  the  American  Forestry  Associa- 
tion of  which  Dr.  Drinker,  President  of  Lehigh  University,  is 
president,  the  following  is  stated: 

"  The  prejudice  against  cutting  of  green  timber  is  deeply  in- 
grained in  the  minds  of  New  York  citizens,  due  to  distrust  of  her 
politicians.  The  situation  demands  the  complete  elimination  of 
politics  from  the  management  of  the  State  forest  lands.  Should 
the  Convention  be  able  to  accomplish  this,  they  need  no  longer 
hesitate  to  permit  cutting.  On  the  Minnesota  National  Forest, 
the  timber  around  the  shores  of  the  lakes  and  other  points  acces- 
sible to  the  public  is  preserved  and  protected  although  the  Forest 
Service  has  the  technical  right  to  cut  and  remove  it.  Areas  of 
especial  value  can  be  so  classified,  and  preserved  in  their  primitive 
condition.  The  remaining  areas,  unaccessible  to  the  public,  can 
be  logged  by  methods  which  preserve  the  forest  cover,  secure 
reproduction  and  prevent  waste  from  decay.  These  methods  have 
been  fully  demonstrated  on  the  National  Forests.  Must  New 
York,  through  timidity,  close  her  eyes  to  progress,  and  either  lock 
up  her  forest  resources,  or  imperil  them  with  ill-considered  half 
measures  '.  Now  is  the  time  for  the  State  to  establish  a  sane  and 
orderly  administration  which  will  bring  the  Adirondack  forests 
to  a  plane  equal  to  that  of  the  wonderful  Black  Forest  of  Ger- 
many, which  while  serving  as  the  recreation  ground  for  the  entire 
region,  supports  hundreds  of  villages  and  thousands  of  persons 
dependent  entirely  on  the  forest  industries  for  their  existence." 

The  New  York  Evening  Mail  in  its  edition  of  July  27,  1915, 
jn  an  editorial  entitled  "Tying  Up  the  State  Forests,"  states  its 
opinion  of  the  report  favored  by  the  majority  of  this  Committee 
in  the  following  words : 


13  Doc.  No.  28 

"  The  Conventions  Committee  on  Conservation  has  decided  to 
recommend  the  continuance  of  the  present  constitutional  prohibi- 
tion against  any  attempt  at  scientific  forestation  of  the  lands  of 
the  State.  No  timber  is  to  be  cut  on  the  State  lands  except  what 
is  dead  or  fallen.  The  construction  of  roads  in  the  Forest  Pre- 
serve will  be  forbidden,  as  well  as  the  future  leasing  of  camp  sites. 
'  The  whole  cause  of  forestry,  and  to  that  extent  of  conserva- 
tion, has  been  greatly  and  stupidly  hindered  in  this  State  by  the 
inability  under  which  the  State  authorities  rest  to  make  any 
economic  or  scientific  use  of  any  part  of  the  State's  forests,  even 
as  a  matter  of  experiment,  instruction  or  example." 

"  The  simple  fact  is  that  the  Adirondack  forests  are  not  con- 
sidered by  our  sapient  legislators  to  be  the  property  of  the  people, 
but  of  the  rich  '  camp  '  owners  and  club  men  who  go  up  there  to 
enjoy  themselves  in  a  luxuriant  manner  in  the  summer  and  to 
shoot  deer  and  other  game  in  the  autumn.  For  their  purposes  the 
forest  seems  well  enough  in  its  roughest  condition.  Scientific 
forestation  makes  no  appeal  to  them  whatever. 

"  We  have  a  chance  in  the  State  of  New  York  for  almost  as 
great  a  development  of  our  forest  wealth  as  has  taken  place  in 
the  empire  of  Germany.  The  central  portion  of  our  two  great 
mountain  ranges  contains  7,200,000  acres,  which  is  under  nom- 
inal fire  protection.  The  State-owned  Forest  Preserve  consists  of 
1,825,852  acres,  to  which  it  is  proposed  to  add  largely.  But  none 
of  this  land  is  under  forest  management;  this,  as  we  have  said,  is 
already  forbidden  by  the  Constitution.  In  the  meantime  we  are 
prevented  by  the  selfish  caprice  of  a  few  millionaires  from  realiz- 
ing so  desirable  a  thing  as  that  which  is  seen  in  Prussia,  where 
the  6,700,000  acres  of  State  forest  yield  a  net  annual  income  of 
$20,500,000,  without  any  deterioration  of  the  forest  whatever." 

These  are  but  a  few  of  the  many  authorities  which  might  be 
referred  to  which  indicate  conclusively  the  error  which  will  be 
made  by  this  Convention  if  it  perpetuates  and  still  further  limits 
the  already  too  narrow  policy  in  the  care,  use,  and  development 
of  the  Forest  Preserve,  of  which  the  majority  of  the  Committee 
is  in  favor.  True  conservation  does  not  consist  in  locking  up 
our  resources  where  the  wealth  therein  contained  must  be  forever 
lost,  but  in  the  utilization  of  these  resources  under  wise  regulation. 

EDWARD  M.  ANGELL. 

OLIN  H.  LANDRETII. 

FERRIS  J.  MEIGS. 


Doc.  No.  28  14 

MINORITY  REPORT 

Mr.  Whipple  presented  the  following  minority  report : 

MINORITY  KEPOKT  FROM  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  CON- 
SERVATION   OF    NATURAL    RESOURCES,     AND 
REASONS  THEREFOR 
The  undersigned,  a  member  of  the  Committee  on  Conservation 
of  Natural  Resources,  disagreeing  with  the  Committee's  report  in 
several,  separate  and  distinct  particulars,  makes  the  accompanying 
minority  report  setting  forth  the  reasons  for  disagreeing  and  in 
what  particulars  the  majority  report   should  be  amended,    and 
asks  that  this  dissent  and  minority  report  be  placed  on  the  General 
Orders  calendar  and  considered  in  connection  with  the  majority 
report  in  the  Committee  of  the  Whole. 

Some  of  the  reasons  that  impel  a  disagreement  with  the  major- 
ity of  the  Committee  are  as  follows : 

1.  On  the  question  of  the  administrative  features  intended  to 
be  provided  for  by  the  proposed  constitutional  amendment  re- 
ported by  the  majority  of  the  Committee,  it  is  believed  that  the 
plan  so  proposed  by  the  Committee,  which  is  for  an  unpaid  board 
of  nine  members,  is  not  justified  by  experience,  will  be  unwork- 
able, will  prove  inefficient  and  be  a  detriment  to  the  public  service. 
It  is  also  believed  that  the  class  of  men,  who  will  from  necessity 
be  selected  as  members  of  such  a  board,  will  be  men  of  wealth, 
whose  business  interests  require  nearly  all  of  their  time  #nd 
attention.  That  they,  or  many  of  them,  will  have  little  or  no 
actual  knowledge  of  the  subject  matter  to  be  under  their  control, 
and  no  time  or  disposition  to  give  it  the  constant,  daily  attention 
this  intricate,  many  headed,  difficult  problem  that  is  bounded  by 
the  limits  of  the  State,  demands. 

That  the  conflicting  opinions  of  the  members  of  this  large 
board,  based  upon  insufficient  knowledge  will  result  in  inaction 
and  in  the  end  will  not  produce  good  results. 

The  whole  history  of  the  department  for  more  than  twenty-five 
years,  establishes  the  fact  that  such  undesirable  results  follow 
when  more  than  one  man  has  been  at  the  head  of  the  commission. 
The  large  commissions  have  always  been  inefficient,  and  made 
little  or  no  progress,  responsibility  has  not  been  centered  and  they 
have  never  worked  well. 


15  Doc.  No.  28 

The  State  has  tried  a  commission  of  seven,  then  one  of  four, 
then  one  of  three,  then  one  of  five,  then  one  of  four,  then  one  of 
three,  then  a  single  commissioner,  which  form  was  continued 
until  1911,  when  a  return  was  made  to  a  three  headed  commission 
and  after  again  trying  that  plan  for  four  years  we  are  back  to  a 
single  headed  commission. 

An  examination  of  the  work  in  the  department  will  disclose  the 
fact,  that  there  was  more  constructive  work  done  under  a  single 
headed  commission  from  1903  to  1911,  a  period  of  eight  years, 
than  there  has  ever  been  done  in  a  much  longer  time  by  any  larger 
commission. 

With  this  experience  and  this  record  it  does  not  seem  wise  to 
the  dissenting  member  of  the  Committee,  that  the  State  should 
again  go  back  to  a  larger  commission  and  especially  when  it  is  to 
be  tied  up  for  twenty  years  by  a  Constitution. 

Further,  the  proposal  is  objectionable  because  the  members  of 
the  board  are  to  be  asked  to  give  their  time,  best  services  and  best 
thought  for  a  long  period  of  years  without  pay.  It  sounds  fine 
in  theory  but  to  work  without  pay  never  has  and  never  will  cause 
men  to  do  their  best  for  a  considerable  length  of  time. 

It  is  objectionable  because  responsibility  is  not  centered.  It  is 
objectionable  because  the  Governor  does  not  appoint  the  superin- 
tendent and  have  power  to  remove  him.  In  fact  such  a  board  is 
just  as  objectionable  from  every  standpoint  as  a  like  board  would 
be  for  the  Agricultural  Department,  the  Highway  Department 
and  many  other  departments.  It  would  be  much  like  the  vermi- 
form appendix  in  man,  useless,  and  should  be  cut  off. 

2nd.  The  majority  proposition  makes  no  provision  for  roads  of 
any  kind  through  this  immense  tract  of  forest  land. 

A  park  without  roads  in  the  right  places,  is  of  much  less  use  to 
the  people  than  it  would  be  with  proper  roads. 

What  would  have  been  thought  when  Central  Park  in  the  City 
of  New  York  was  established,  if  no  roads  had  been  provided  for 
and  the  commission  prohibited  from  making  any  ? 

In  time,  this  wonderful  woodland  park  will  be  to  the  people 
of  the  whole  State  what  Central  Park  is  to  the  people  of  Greater 
New  York. 

These  parks  and  playgrounds  of  the  people  are  for  use.     Easy 


Doc.  Xo.  28  16 

and  convenient  ways  should  be  provided  for  ingress  and  egress. 
Therefore  this  minority  report  suggests  at  least  that  a  State  high- 
way may  be  provided  for  by  the  Legislature,  running  from  Old 
Forge  northerly  along  the  Fulton  Chain  of  Lakes  and  thence  north- 
erly to  connect  with  some  main  highway  at  or  near  the  Saranac 
Lakes.  Such  a  road  would  run  through  the  most  beautiful  part 
of  the  Adirondacks,  would  furnish  an  acceptable  and  beautiful 
way  from  the  southern  side  to  get  in  and  out,  and  would  afford 
better  opportunity  for  protecting  as  many  as  forty  miles  of  wood- 
land from  fire. 

For  these  reasons  dissent  is  made  to  that  part  of  the  majority 
report. 

3rd.  Inasmuch  as  the  majority  report  provided  that  dead  trees 
and  timber  may  be  taken  out  where  necessary,  for  better  fire  pro- 
tection and  reforestation,  but  declares  such  material  cannot  be 
used,  dissent  is  made  to  that  proposition  because  it  is  not  compre- 
hensive enough. 

There  seems  to  be  no  good  reason  why  such  material  should 
not  be  used  at  least  for  fire  wood  for  domestic  purposes  by  the  res- 
ident people,  (there  are  several  thousand  of  such  people)  some 
revenue  obtained  and  thereby  relieve  a  bad  situation  that  exists 
in  many  places  where  the  people  have  to  pay  as  much  as  $14.00 
a  ton  for  coal,  while  millions  of  cords  of  stove  Wood  are  in  sight  in 
dead  and  down  trees,  doing  no  good  to  any  one  and  in  many  in- 
stances making  a  dangerous  situation  and  opportunity  for  more 
fire. 

4th.  Dissent  is  made  to  that  portion  of  the  majority  report  that 
provides  for  permits,  ratifying  and  making  legal  the  occupancy 
on  State  land  of  five  or  six  hundred  people,  who  for  years  have 
been  occupying  the  people's  property  without  legal  authority  and 
in  violation  of  the  provisions  of  the  Constitution.  That  proposi- 
tion appears  to  be  a  proposed  premium  on  doing  wrong  and  to 
the  exclusion  of  all  those  who  obey  the  law  and  do  right.  It  sin- 
gles out  a  special  class  who  have  been  violating  the  law,  gives  them 
special  privileges  and  excludes  all  others  from  enjoying  like 
privileges. 

For  the  foregoing  reasons  this  minority  report  is  made  and 
amendments  to  the  majority  report  suggested  in  these  particulars. 


17  Doc.  No.  28 

with  the  hope  that  the  reasons  for  dissenting  are  so  plain  and 
reasonable,  that  the  Convention  will  adopt  these  minority  proposi- 
tions. 

J.  S.  WHIPPLE. 

PKOPOSED  CONSTITUTIONAL  AMENDMENT 
Article 

Section  1.  The  department  of  conservation  shall  consist  of  a 
single  commissioner,  appointed  by  the  Governor  and  subject  to  re- 
moval by  him  on  charges  after  an  opportunity  to  be  heard.  The 
commissioner's  term  of  office  shall  be  six  years.  His  compensa- 
tion shall  be  fixed  by  law.  He  shall  appoint  and  may,  at  pleasure, 
remove  a  depnty  commissioner  and  fix  his  salary.  He  may  also 
appoint  all  necessary  subordinates,  all  of  whom  shall  be  selected 
from  eligible  lists  from  open  competitive  examination  conducted 
by  the  Civil  Service  Commission. 

Subject  to  the  limitations  in  this  article  contained,  the  depart- 
ment shall  be  charged  with  the  development  and  protection  of  the 
natural  resources  of  the  State ;  the  encouragement  of  forestry  and 
the  suppression  of  forest  fires  throughout  the  State;  the  exclusive 
care,  maintenance  and  administration  of  the  forest  preserve;  the 
control,  conservation,  prevention  of  pollution,  and  regulation  of 
the  waters  of  the  State ;  the  protection  and  propagation  of  its  fish, 
birds,  game,  shell-fish  and  Crustacea,  with  the  exclusive  power, 
subject  to  the  veto  of  the  Governor,  to  enact' regulations  with  re- 
spect to  the  taking,  possession,  sale  and  transportation  thereof,  and 
shall  exercise  such  additional  powers  as  from  time  to  time  may 
be  conferred  by  law. 

§  2.  The  lands  of  the  State,  now  owned  or  hereafter  acquired, 
constituting  the  forest  preserve  as  now  fixed  by  law,  shall  be  for- 
ever kept  as  wild  forest  lands.  They  shall  not  be  leased,  sold  or 
exchanged,  or  be  taken  by  any  corporation,  public  or  private,  nor 
shall  the  trees  or  timber  thereon  be  sold,  removed  or  destroyed. 
The  Commission  is,  however,  empowered  to  reforest  lands  in  the 
forest  preserve,  to  construct  fire  trails  thereon,  and  to  remove  dead 
trees  and  dead  timber  therefrom  for  purposes  of  reforestation  and 
fire  protection  solely,  but  shall  not  sell  the  same,  except  for  fire 
wood  for  domestic  purposes. 


Doc.  No.  28  18 

§  3.  The  legislature  may  by  general  laws  provide  for  the  use 
of  not  exceeding  three  per  centum  of  such  lands  for  the  construc- 
tion and  maintenance  of  reservoirs  for  municipal  water  supply, 
for  the  canals  of  the  State  and  to  regulate  the  flow  of  streams. 
Such  reservoirs  shall  be  constructed,  owned  and  controlled  by  the 
State,  but  such  work  shall  not  be  undertaken  until  after  the  bound- 
aries and  high  flow  lines  thereof  shall  have  been  accurately  sur- 
veyed and  fixed,  and  after  public  notice,  hearing  and  determina- 
tion that  such  lands  are  required  for  such  public  use.  The  ex- 
pense of  any  such  improvements  shall  be  apportioned  on  the 
public  and  private  property  and  municipalities  benefited  to  the  ex- 
tent of  the  benefits  received.  Any  such  reservoir  shall  always  be 
operated  by  the  State  and  the  Legislature  shall  provide  a  charge 
upon  the  property  and  municipalities  benefited  for  a  reasonable 
return  to  the  State  upon  the  value  of  the  rights  and  property  of 
the  State  used  and  the  services  of  the  State  rendered,  which  shall 
be  fixed  for  terms  of  not  exceeding  ten  years,  and  be  readjustable 
at  the  end  of  any  term.  Unsanitary  conditions  shall  not  be 
created  or  continued  by  any  such  public  works. 

§  4.  The  legislature  may  authorize  the  use  by  the  city  of  New 
York  for  its  municipal  water  supply  of  certain  lands  now  be- 
longing to  the  State  located  in  the  townships  of  Hurley  and 
Shandaken  in  the  county  of  Ulster  and  in  the  township  of  Lex- 
ington in  the  county  of  Greene,  for  just  compensation. 

§  5.  The  legislature  shall,  for  twenty  years  from  and  after 
the  adoption  of  this  Constitution,  provide  annually  by  bond  issue 
or  otherwise,  the  sum  of  not  less  than  $500,000  for  the  purchase 
of  real  property  within  the  Adirondack  and  Catskill  Parks,  the 
reforestation  of  lands,  and  the  making  of  boundary  and  valuation 
surveys.  Such  funds  shall  be  expended  by  the  Departmenl  of 
Conservation  on  the  approval  of  the  Governor. 

§  6.  The  legislature  may  provide  for  the  construction  o\'  [lie 
State  highway  from  Old  Forge  along  the  Fulton  Chain  of  Lakes 
and  thence  to  connect  with  a  highway  at  or  near  the  Saranac 
Lakes. 

§  7.  A  violation  of  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  article  may 
be  restrained  at  tin1  suit  of  the  people,  or  with  the  consent  i)\'  the 
Supremo  Court  in  Appellate  Division,  on  notice  to  the  Attorney- 
General  at  the  suit  of  any  citizen. 


19  Doc.  No.  28 

MINORITY    REPORT 
Mr.  Austin  presented  the  following  minority  report: 

MINORITY  REPORT  AS  TO  THE  PROPOSED  CONSER- 
VATION ARTICLE 

With  the  general  policy  proposed  by  the  Conservation  Com- 
mittee as  to  the  preservation  of  the  State's  natural  resources  I 
am  in  entire  accord;  it  is  only  with  the  methods  by  which  it  pro- 
poses to  carry  out  this  general  policy  that  I  am  at  variance. 

I  dissent  from  the  proposal  for  a  nine-headed  unpaid  Conser- 
vation Commission  for  the  reasons  stated  by  Delegate  Whipple 
in  the  minority  report,  submitted  by  him,  and  for  the  further 
reason  that  I  have  very  grave  doubts  as  to  the  advisability  of 
giving  these  nine  unpaid  commissioners  the  absolute  power,  sub- 
ject only  to  executive  veto,  to  make  the  fish  and  game  laws  for  the 
State. 

I  well  realize  the  many  inconsistencies  which  have  arisen  from 
the  multitude  of  fish  and  game  laws  enacted  by  the  Legislature, 
and  I  think  the  Conservation  Department  should  have  much  dis- 
cretion delegated  to  it  in  the  matter  of  protecting  wild  life,  but 
we  are  going  too  far  when  we  say  that  the  Legislature  shall  be 
deprived  of  even  a  reserve  power  over  this  subject. 

I  also  dissent  from  that  part  of  the  majority  report  which  would 
place  in  the  Constitution  a  provision  commanding  the  Legislature 
to  appropriate  at  least  five  hundred  thousand  dollars  annually  for 
the  purchase  of  lands,  reforestation,  the  making  of  surveys,  etc. 

The  proposal  to  appropriate  specific  sums  of  public  money  by  a 
constitutional  provision,  operative  for  twenty  years  in  the  future, 
does  violence  to  all  our  accepted  principles  of  State  finance,  and 
seems  to  be  indefensible  from  any  view  point.  It  may  well  be 
proper  for  the  Constitution  to  declare  that  sufficient  moneys  be 
provided  by  the  Legislature  to  carry  out  the  State  policy  as  to 
conservation  therein  enunciated,  as  has  been  done  with  reference 
to  canals  by  Section  9  of  Article  VII  of  the  present  Constitution ; 
but  to  command  the  Legislature  to  appropriate  half  a  million  of 
dollars  for  twenty  years  to  come,  regardless  of  conditions,  which 
are  sure  to  change,  and  of  variations  in  the  State  revenues  and 
expenditures  which  are  bound  to  occur,  is  an  entirely  different 
proposition. 


Doc.  No.  28  20 

It  is  my  personal  belief,  based  upon  my  own  experience,  that 
an  annual  appropriation  of  the  sum  suggested  will  be  desirable 
for  many  years  to  come,  but  the  appropriation  of  money  to  carry 
out  the  State's  activities  is  essentially  a  legislative  function,  not 
that  of  a  Constitution.  The  necessities  of  one  State  department 
must  be  considered  in  connection  with  the  needs  in  other  directions 
and  the  probable  revenues ;  these  cannot  be  absolutely  determined 
live,  ten  or  twenty  years  in  advance.  Therefore,  having  defined 
the  general  policy  which  we  believe  the  State  should  pursue,  it 
seems  that  we  should  go  no  further,  for  we  must  assume  that  the 
Legislature  will  provide  the  funds  necessary  to  carry  out  that 
policy,  if  consistent  with  the  other  demands  upon  the  public 
treasury.  Unless  this  be  true  our  entire  theory  of  the  administra- 
tion and  control  of  State  finance  should  be  discarded. 

H.  LEROY  AUSTIN. 


STATE  OF  NEW    YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  29 


OFFERED  BY  MR.  M.  J.  O'BRIEN  AS  A  SUBSTITUTE  FOR 
PROPOSED  AMENDMENT  No.  752,  Int.  No.  699 


PROPOSED  CONSTITUTIONAL  AMENDMENT 

To  amend  section  nine  of  Article  I  of  the  Constitution,  in  relation 

to  the  right  of  electors  to  select  candidates  for  office 

The  Delegates  of  the  People  of  the  State  of  New  York,  in 
Convention  assembled,  do  propose  as  follows: 

Section  nine  of  article  one  is  hereby  amended  to  read  as  follows : 
§  9.  No  law  shall  abridge  the  right  of  the  people  peaceably  to 
assemble  and  to  petition  the  government,  or  any  department 
thereof;  nor  the  right  of  the  electors,  or  any  number  of  them,  to 
associate  and  select  candidates  to  be  voted  for  at  any  election  for 
public  office  in  such  method  as  they  may  deem  proper;  nor  shall 
any  divorce  be  granted  otherwise  than  by  due  judicial  proceed- 
ings; nor  shall  any  lottery  or  the  sale  of  lottery  tickets,  pool 
selling,  book  making,  or  any  other  kind  of  gambling  hereafter 
be  authorized  or  allowed  within  this  state,  and  the  legislature  shall 
pass  appropriate  laws  to  prevent  offenses  against  any  of  the  pro- 
visions of  this  section. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.   30 


MINORITY  REPORT  ON   PROPOSED  CONSTITUTIONAL 
AMENDMENT  NO.  765  (Int.  No.  194) 


July  29,  1915 

Mr.  Leggett  presented  the  following  minority  report  in  relation 
to  "  Proposed  constitutional  amendment  to  amend  Article  III  of 
the  Constitution  by  inserting  a  new  section,  in  relation  to  delega- 
tion of  legislative  power  in  matters  affecting  employees,"  (No. 
765,  Int.  No.  194.) 

The  minority  of  the  committee  opposes  the  adoption  of  this  pro- 
posal for  the  following  reasons : 

That  no  instances  were  quoted  to  the  committee  calling  for  addi- 
tional power  in  the  Legislature  to  remedy  the  evils  sought  to  be 
cured. 

That  the  wording  of  the  proposal  is  so  broad  as  to  easily  make 
possible  the  adoption  by  executive  boards  of  rules  and  regulations 
that  would  cover  ground  not  contemplated  by  the  Legislature. 

This  would  at  the  best  constitute  the  board  a  Legislature  without 
the  safeguards  of  a  Legislature  and  without  its  responsibility  to 
the  people,  and  at  the  worst,  it  would  go  so  far  as  practically  to 
defeat  the  will  of  the  Legislature. 

J.  C.  LEGGETT. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  31 


MINORITY  REPORT  ON   PROPOSED  CONSTITUTIONAL 
AMENDMENT  NO.  419  (Int.  No.  407) 


July  29,  1915 

Mr.  Leggett  presented  the  following  minority  report  in  relation 
to  "  Proposed  constitutional  amendment  to  amend  Article  III  of 
the  Constitution,  in  regard  to  the  power  of  the  Legislature  to  pro- 
hibit manufacturing  in  structures  used  for  dwelling  purposes." 
(No.  419,  Int.  No.  407.) 

The  minority  of  the  committee  respectfully  opposes  the  adoption 
of  this  proposal  for  the  following  reasons : 

That  the  right  of  the  individual  to  earn  his  own  living  and  that 
of  his  family  by  the  labor  of  his  own  hands  in  his  own  home 
through  the  pursuit  of  a  lawful  and  innocent  occupation  should 
never  be  at  the  risk  of  the  tyranny,  caprice  or  mistake  of  the  Legis- 
lature. 

That  this  is  a  right  which  has  existed  from  time  immemorial 
and  which  the  state  should  not  be  permitted  to  take  away. 

Men  have  organized  rebellions  and  suffered  death  for  less  cause 
than  would  be  possible  under  this  proposal. 

J.  C.  LEGGETT. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN   CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  32 


REPORT  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  STATE  FINANCES, 
REVENUES  AND  EXPENDITURES,  RELATIVE  TO  A 
BUDGET  SYSTEM  FOR  THE  STATE 


August  4,  1915 

Mr.  Stinison,  on  behalf  of  the  Committee  on  State  Finances. 
Revenues  and  Expenditures,  presented  the  following"  memoranda : 

THE  RAPIDLY  INCREASING  GROWTH  OF  GOVERN- 
MENT EXPENDITURE 

Your  Committee  has  pointed  out  in  its  recent  report  to  the 
Convention  on  Article  VII  of  the  Constitution  the  very  rapid* 
increase  in  debt  of  the  State  of  New  York  and  of  its  political 
subdivisions ;  it  has  pointed  out  that  the  State  debt,  whether 
measured  in  the  aggregate  or  per  capita,  now  greatly  exceeds  the 
debt  of  every  other  State  in  the  nation  and  that  the  same  is  true 
of  the  debt  of  its  political  subdivisions,  taken  either  in  the  aggre- 
gate or  per  capita.  It.  now  invites  attention  to  the  similar  rapid 
increase  in  the  cost  of  the  government  of  the  State.  The  ex- 
penditures out  of  the  general  fund  of  the  State,  exclusive  of 
interest  on  the  canal  and  highway  debts  and  of  the  free  school 
fund,  have  increased  from  $7,103,831.18  in  1885.  to  $12,408,- 


Doc.  No,  32  2 

488.24  in  1914.  This  represents  an  increase  in  general  running 
expenses  of  nearly  600  per  cent,  in  thirty  years.  This  increase 
of  expenditures,  as  shown  by  five-year  periods,  is  as  follows : 

1885 $7,  163,  S31  18 

1890 . 7,  200,  056  54 

1895    •  • 12,  066,  646  97 

1900    17,  696,  398  85 

1905 24,  511,  946  95 

1910 34,  791,  576  01 

1914    42,  408,  488  24 

During  this  period  the  population  of  the  State  has  increased 
only  82  per  cent.  During  this  period  the  assessed  valuation  of 
real  and  personal  property  liable  to  taxation  in  the  State  has  in- 
creased from  $3,224,682,343  to  $12,070,345,088,  a  percentage  of 
only  274.  Furthermore,  a  large  portion  of  this  increase  in  assessed 
valuation  does  not  represent  a  real  increase  in  property  but  is  due 
either  to  new  methods  of  taxation,  like  the  Special  Franchise  Tax, 
first  levied  in  1899,  or  to  increases  in  percentages  of  assessment, 
as,  for  example,  in  New  York  city,  where  in  1903  the  rate  of 
assessment  was  raised  from  between  67  and  75  per  cent,  to  approxi- 
mately 90  per  cent. 

Until  recently  the  State  has  not  felt  the  strain  of  this  dis- 
proportionate rise  in  expenditures  because  it  has  been  able  to 
meet  them  by  its  revenues  from  indirect  taxation.  But  it  has 
now  become  apparent  that  the  limit  of  indirect  taxation  has  been 
practically  reached.  Indirect  revenues  fell  off  $1,900,000  from 
1913  to  1914  and  the  Governor  in  his  message  of  January  7,  1914, 
stated  that  in  his  opinion  the  maximum  indirect  revenue  had  been 
practically  reached. 

According  to  the  report  of  the  Census  Bureau  the  governmental 
cost  per  capita  of  the  State  government  of  New  York  rose  from 
$2.47  in  1895  to  $5.41  in  li>14,  an  increase  of  235  per  cent,  whero 
the  population  of  the  State  had  gained  only  53  per  cent,  during 
nineteen  years.  During  tluil  period  assessed  valuations  in  the 
State  rose  only   171   per  cent.,    including  both   of  the   fictitious 


3  Doc.  No.  32 

increases  above  mentioned.  In  other  words,  the  State  government 
cost  each  resident  more  than  double  the  amount  it  cost  in  1895. 

This  rapidly  increasing  per  capita  cost  of  government  is  a 
phenomenon  which  is  not  peculiar  to  New  York  State  but  is 
occurring  likewise  in  other  State  governments,  and  also  in  the 
Federal  government  although  to  a  less  extent  than  in  New  York. 
The  cost  of  the  Federal  government  in  thirty  years  prior  to  1908 
has  increased  nearly  400  per  cent.,  while  the  increase  in  the  popu- 
lation was  less  than  84  per  cent.  The  growth  in  ordinary  ex- 
penditure for  carrying  on  that  government,  excluding  interest  on 
the  public  debt  but  including  payments  for  pensions  and  many 
public  works,  rose  from  $135,000,000  in  1878  to  $637,000,000  in 
1908.  (See  Statement  of  Hon.  George  B.  Cortelyou,  former 
Secretary  of  Treasury,  in  North  American  Review  for  April, 
1909.) 

Hon.  James  A.  Tawney,  the  last  Republican  Chairman  of  the 
Committee  on  Appropriations  of  the  House  of  Representatives, 
made  the  following  statement  in  1909  : 

"  In  no  period,  except  in  time  of  war,  have  the  expenditures 
of  our  national  government  increased  so  rapidly,  both  in  the 
aggregate  and  per  capita,  as  these  expenditures  have  increased 
during  the  past  eight  years.  This  fact  may  well  cause  our  people 
not  only  to  pause  and  consider  the  cause  of  this  very  large  in- 
crease in  the  annual  expenditures  of  the  government,  but  also  to 
consider  the  necessity  of  checking  this  growing  tendency  towards 


The  Hon.  John  J.  Fitzgerald,  the  present  Democratic  Chair- 
man of  the  same  Committee  in  the  House  of  Representatives,  in 
a  hearing  before  your  Committee  on  May  26,  1915,  pointed  out 
the  same  rapid  increase  in  the  expenses  of  government  and  said: 

"  We  have  reached  a  point  in  our  Federal  expenditures,  now 
aggregating  a  hundred  million  dollars  a  year,  when  it  is  neces- 
sary either  to  very  greatly  increase  the  taxes  levied  by  the  Federal 
government  or  else  to  curtail  present  activities  or  stop  expanding 
the  activities  of  the  government. 

"  We  have  reached  about  the  limit  of  revenue  under  our  present 
systems  and  if  the  government  is  to  continue  to  expand  and  in- 
crease its  activities  there  must  necessarily  be  very  greatly  in- 
creased revenues."     (Document  No.  15,  p.  4.) 


Doc.  Xo.  32  4 

The  same  accelerating  rate  of  the  cost  of  government  is  to  be 
found  throughout  the  States,  although  the  figures  show  that  New 
York  is  the  worst  offender.  The  average  cost  of  government  of  all 
of  the  States  of  the  Union  rose  105.9  per  cent,  from  1903  to  1913, 
according  to  the  Census  Bureau  figures.  During  that  time  the 
population  of  the  States  rose  only  20  per  cent.  Of  these  the  cost 
of  government  of  the  States  of  the  Middle  Atlantic  division  rose 
160.3  per  cent,  and  of  New  York  State  rose  200.2  per  cent. 

To  sum  up,  we  find  that  throughout  the  country  the  amount 
of  money  spent  on  government,  both  State  and  National,  is 
increasing  much  more  rapidly  than  the  population  and  much 
more  rapidly  than  the  sources  of  supply,  in  the  shape  of  property 
subject  to  taxation. 

Undoubtedly  this  increase  of  cost  is  largely  due  to  the  fact  that 
government  has  greatly  extended  its  activities.  There  is  no 
reason  to  suppose,  however,  that  any  real  or  permanent  check  can 
be  put  upon  this  increase.  It  arises  out  of  the  constantly  increas- 
ing complexity  of  modern  life  and  modern  business  and  the  in- 
creasing density  of  our  population.  So  lung  as  these  factors  con- 
tinue, greater  and  greater  demands  will  be  made  upon  the  activi- 
ties of  government.  They  represent  an  economic  pressure  which 
is  constantly  growing. 

Out  of  these  facts  arises  the  corresponding  and  increasing  need 
for  sound  financial  methods  in  conducting  the  business  of  govern- 
ment. With  States,  as  with  individuals,  the  habit  of  expenditure 
breeds  extravagance,  and  it  cannot  be  assumed  that  the  comple- 
tion of  particular  projects  will  counteract  the  desire  to  spend. 
America  is  only  at  the  threshold  of  her  problem.  If,  under  our 
present  methods,  the  cost  of  government  has  already  reached  the 
limit  of  reasonable  taxation,  it  only  makes  it  clear  that  we  should 
examine  our  methods  in  order  to  prevent  unnecessary  waste. 

It  has  been  frequently  pointed  out  that  the  United  States  is 
substantially  the  only  civilized  country  where,  in  both  its  National 
and  State  governments,  a  scientific  budget  system  is  unknown. 
No  financial  plan  is  presented  to  our  Legislature  in  public  each 
year  by  the  men  who  are  responsible  for  the  conduct  of  govern- 
ment. No  considered  estimates  of  the  future,  no  material  what- 
ever for  comparison  with  the  past,  is  presented  by  our  executives 


5  Doc.  No.  32 

to  the  Legislature  in  such  a  way  that  that  body  and  the  public 
can  understand  them  and  hold  the  spenders  of  our  public  money 
responsible;  instead,  our  appropriation  and  revenue  bills  are 
made  up  in  the  comparative  secrecy  of  legislative  committees  and 
rushed  through  in  the  hurry  of  the  final  days  of  a  legislative 
session. 

The  effect  of  this  looseness  of  method  has  long  been  apparent 
in  the  results  of  our  expenditures.  For  many  years  we  have  been 
spending  half  as  much  upon  our  army  as  Germany  has  spent  upon 
hers,  and  a  still  greater  percentage  of  what  France  has  spent  upon 
hers,  but  where  their  expenditure  has  produced  forces  which  are 
now  astonishing  the  world  by  their  size  and  efficiency,  our  expend- 
itures from  the  lack  of  the  proper  working  machinery  between  the 
executive  and  Congress  which  a  budget  system  would  supply  has 
largely  been  wasted  upon  unnecessary  army  posts  in  the  districts 
of  influential  congressmen.  The  same  is  true  in  respect  to  our 
navy,  where  money  necessary  for  dreadnoughts  is  spent  on  use- 
less navy  yards  in  favored  localities.  Our  river  and  harbor  appro- 
priation bills  have  obtained  the  name  "  Pork  Barrel  Bills  "  be- 
cause their  contents  are  looked  upon  more  from  the  standpoint 
of  the  political  requirements  of  legislators  than  of  national  routes 
of  transportation.  The  same  lack  of  responsible  aim  has  marked 
our  appropriations  for  public  buildings. 

Nearly  thirty  years  ago  this  fundamental  defect  in  our  national 
system  was  pointed  out  by  Mr.  James  Bryce  in  that  leading  study 
of  our  institutions,  The  American  Commonwealth,  where  he  said, 
quoting  an  American  publicist: 

"  A  thoughtful  American  publicist  remarks :  '  So  long  as  the 
debit  side  of  the  national  account  is  managed  by  one  set  of  men, 
and  the  credit  side  by  another  set,  both  sets  working  separately 
and  in  secret  without  public  responsibility,  and  without  inter- 
vention on  the  part  of  the  executive  official  who  is  nominally  re- 
sponsible; so  long  as  these  sets,  being  composed  largely  of  new 
men  every  two  years,  give  no  attention  to  business  except  when 
Congress  is  in  session  and  thus  spend  in  preparing  plans  the  whole 
time  which  ought  to  be  spent  in  public  discussion  of  plans  already 
matured,  so  that  an  immense  budget  is  rushed  through  without 


Doc.  No.  32  6 

discussion  in  a  week  or  ten  days  —  just  so  long  the  finances  will 
go  from  bad  to  worse  no  matter  by  what  name  you  call  the  party 
in  power.  Ko  other  nation  on  earth  attempts  such  a  thing  or 
could  attempt  it  without  soon  coming  to  grief,  our  salvation  thus 
far  consisting  in  an  enormous  income  with  practically  no  drain 
for  military  expenditure.'  .  .  .  Under  the  system  of  congres- 
sional finance  here  described  America  wastes  millions  annually. 
But  here  wealth  is  so  great,  here  revenue  so  elastic,  that  she  is  not 
sensible  of  the  loss.  She  has  the  glorious  privilege  of  youth,  the 
privilege  of  committing  errors  without  suffering  from  their  con- 
sequences." (The  American  Commonwealth,  Vol.  I,  pp.  177- 
179.) 

These  words  were  uttered  over  a  quarter  of  a  century  ago.  The 
figures  of  our  taxable  resources  alluded  to  above  make  it  evident 
that  this  period  of  youthful  privilege  is  now  over  and  that  we  in 
America  can  no  longer  claim  the  same  exemption  from  the  condi- 
tions governing  other  communities. 

In  view  of  the  foregoing  facts  your  Committee  believes  that  the 
only  alternative  to  a  grave  danger  of  general  discontent  arising  out 
of  the  constantly  increasing  burden  of  taxation  is  a  thorough  and 
drastic  revision  of  our  financial  methods. 

Your  Committee  has  made  a  careful  study  of  the  methods  of 
financial  legislation  of  this  State.  It  has  had  before  it  gentlemen 
representing  all  phases  of  legislative  and  executive  activity  of  the 
State  including  men  who  had  held  or  still  occupied  the  positions 
of  Governor,  Comptroller,  Speaker  and  chairman  of  the  principal 
committees  of  both  houses  of  the  Legislature.  It  has  had  before  it 
men  thoroughly  familiar  with  those  activities  in  the  Federal  gov- 
ernment, including  ex-President  Taft  and  Mr.  Fitzgerald,  Chair- 
man of  the  Committee  on  Appropriations  of  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives. It  has  examined  into  the  budget  methods  of  the  cities 
of  this  State  and  budget  methods  in  vogue  in  Great  Britain,  Canada 
and  other  countries. 

As  a  result,  it  presents  its  conclusions  as  to  the  chief  defects  in 
the  present  methods  of  financial  legislation  in  the  State  of  New 
York  and  finds  that  the  following  are  the  chief  causes  of  waste 
and  extravagance  in  those  methods: 


7  Doc.  No.  32 

DEFECTS  OF  PRESENT  SYSTEM  IN  NEW  YORK  STATE 


Lack  of  Responsible  Revision  of  the  Departmental 
Estimates 

Under  the  Laws  of  1910,  chap.  149,  the  annual  estimates  of  the 
various  departments,  bureaus  and  commissions  of  the  State  are 
to  be  submitted  by  them  to  the  Comptroller  on  November  15th  of 
every  year  for  transmission  to  the  Legislature.  The  Comptroller 
has  no  power  to  revise  or  reduce  these  estimates  when  submitted 
or  even  to  compel  their  timely  submission.  His  only  function  is 
to  assemble  them  and  transmit  them  to  the  Legislature.  No  other 
executive  officer  has  any  power    to  revise  or  co-ordinate  them. 

As  a  result,  they  are  made  up  by  the  various  bureau  chiefs  who 
consider  only  their  own  desires  without  regard  to  the  revenues  or 
other  needs  of  government  and  as  a  result  the  aggregate  of  these 
estimates  mounts  into  a  sum  which  bears  no  responsible  relation 
either  to  any  consistent  plan  for  expenditures  for  the  coming  year 
or  to  any  plan  for  raising  revenue  In  size  they  are  limited  only 
by  the  enthusiasm  of  each  bureau  chief  for  the  activities  of  his 
own  bureau. 

The  evil  is  very  much  aggravated  by  the  fact  that  there  is  no 
adequate  organization  of  these  bureaus  and  commissions  into  a 
limited  number  of  departments.  The  estimates  of  the  various 
officers,  instead  of  being  sent  to  the  Comptroller  through  a  de- 
partmental chief  who  can  revise  and  reduce  the  estimates  of  his 
subordinates,  are  transmitted  directly  to  the  Comptroller.  Almost 
the  only  exception  to  this  lack  of  system  is  in  the  somewhat 
limited  oversight  exercised  by  the  Fiscal  Supervisor  of  Charities. 

As  a  result,  when  these  estimates  reach  the  Legislature  they  are 
regularly  so  high  that  very  little  attention  is  paid  to  them.  They 
are  necessarily  treated  as  mere  requests  for  money  desired  rather 
than  as  responsible  estimates  of  the  amounts  rquired.  The  Legis- 
lature is  therefore  itself  forced  to  undertake  the  work  of  proposing 
and  formulating  for  the  first  time  a  program  of  the  annual  ex- 
penditures. 


Doc.  Ko.  32 


II 


The  Legislature  is  Not  the  Proper  Body  to  Prepare  a 
Financial  Plan  of  Expenditure 

Your  Committee  lias  reached  the  conclusion  that  the  Legisla- 
ture is  not  the  proper  branch  of  the  government  to  initiate  such  a 
program  of  annual  expenditures  and  that  in  attempting  to  do  so 
it  labors  under  the  following  insuperable  disadvantages: 

(a)  Its  proper  work  is  legislative;  it  has  no  administrative  con- 
trol or  authority  over  the  bureaus  and  departments  through  which 
the  moneys  of  the  State  are  expended  and  necessarily  cannot  have 
such  authority.  It  is  therefore  without  the  consistent  regular  in- 
formation as  to  operating  difficulties,  problems,  methods  and  costs 
which  would  naturally  come  to  the  superior  officer  of  those  bureaus. 
Instead  it  must  act  upon  such  information  as  it  can  acquire 
through  hearings  held  by  committees,  meeting  only  occasionally. 

The  Legislature  cannot  exercise  executive  supervision  to  compel 
a  given  bureau  to  try  to  produce  the  desired  result  with  less  money 


by  adopting  a  more  efficient  method.  It  cannot  exercise  executive 
authority  to  reconcile  conflicts  between  overlapping  or  encroaching 
bureaus  so  as  to  prevent  duplication  of  effort  and  expense.  In  a 
word,  it  cannot  produce  the  constant  necessary  team  play  and  co- 
operation which  is  essential  to  economy. 

(b)  The  Legislature  is  under  the  further  disadvantage  that  its 
members,  instead  of  being  responsible  solely  to  the  Slate  as  a 
whole,  are  each  responsible  to  and  dependent  upon  a  single  district 
of  the  State.  A  financial  program  made  up  in  the  first  instance 
by  the  Legislature  necessarily  tends  to  represent  a  compromise  or 
bargain  between  different  districts  rather  than  the  viewpoint  of  the 
State  as  a  whole.  The  treatment  of  the  multitude  of  separate  items 
necessarily  tends  to  that  process  of  give  and  take  which  has  become 
so  common  in  America  as  to  be  stigmatized  by  the  terms  "log 
rolling  "  and  "  pork  barrel." 

(c)  In  the  third  place,  the  very  fact  that  the  program  is  made 
up  in  the  Legislature  ai  once  tends  to  shield  it  from  real  criticism 
by  the  Legislature.  No  body  can  adequately  criticize  its  own 
work.  This  applies  both  to  criticism  by  the  majority  and  min- 
ority parties.     A  real  budget  program  presented  by  the  executive 


9  Doc.  No.  32 

to  the  Legislature  should  receive,  and  in  other  countries  regularly 
does  receive,  criticisms  and  suggestions,  even  from  the  executive  s 
own  party  members.  The  viewpoint  of  the  man  who  grants  money 
is  different  from  the  viewpoint  of  the  man  who  asks  for  it,  even 
when  they  both  belong  to  the  same  party.  Under  our  methods  the 
man  who  makes  up  the  program  is  the  same  man  who  afterwards 
leads  the  debate  on  the  majority  side.  Xo  criticism  whatever  from 
him  can  be  expected.  It  is  his  own  program.  On  the  other  hand, 
so  far  as  the  minority  is  concerned,  they  also  have  participated  in 
the  work  of  the  committees  and,  to  a  certain  extent,  their  views 
have  also  been  accommodated.  And  even  in  those  cases  where  they 
differ  with  the  program,  inadequate  opportunity  for  the  discus- 
sion of  the  issue  thus  presented  has  been  afforded  under  our 
methods,  as  will  be  shown  under  the  following  subdivisions.  As  a 
result,  the  budget  debates  of  the  Legislature,  after  the  appropria- 
tion bill  has  been  made  up,  have  become  formal  and  perfunctory, 
(d)  Finally,  the  fact  that  no  program  for  consideration  and 
discussion  takes  form  until  the  Legislature  itself  makes  up  the  ap- 
propriation bill,  tends  to  destroy  publicity  and  opportunity  for 
debate.  Instead  of  there  being  an  entire  financial  program  laid 
before  the  Legislature  by  a  responsible  executive  early  in  the  ses- 
sion with  which  every  citizen  in  the  State  can  familiarize  himself, 
comparing  its  items  with  the  corresponding  expenditures  of  pre- 
ceding years,  and  as  to  which,  therefore,  he  can  put  himself  in  a 
position  to  understand  the  issues  and  debates,  no  citizen  now  in 
the  ordinary  course  learns  anything  of  any  program  until  the 
Ways  and  Means  Committee  reports  the  appropriation  bill  so  late 
in  the  session  that  there  is  no  apportunity  for  effective  suggestion 
or  criticism.  The  bill  has  then  received  the  approval  of  the 
various  elements  and  leaders  in  committee  and  the  subsequent  dis- 
cussions mean  little.  This  evil  has  been  accentuated  by  the  misuse 
of  the  emergency  message,  under  which,  during  the  past  twenty- 
one  years,  every  appropriation  bill  except  one  has  been  hurried 
through  in  the  final  hours  of  the  session  without  the  necessity  even 
of  being  printed  and  lying  on  the  desks  of  members  for  three  days. 
We  think  it  is  safe  to  say  that  under  ordinary  conditions  not  only 
is  the  public  ignorant  of  the  items  of  appropriation  bills  until  they 
are  enacted  into  Law,  but  the  same  ignorance  applies  to  the  mem- 


Doc.  No.  32  10 

bers  of  the  Legislature  outside  of  the  one  or  two  men  who  control 
the  conduct  of  the  bill. 

It  is,  therefore,  almost  impossible  to  create  a  real  issue,  a  real 
debate  on  the  subject  of  economy  and  without  the  publicity  of  such 
an  issue  and  such  debate  your  Committee  does  not  believe  that  real 
economy  can  be  attained. 

Ill 

No   Complete   Financial   Program   or  Budget   at   Present 
Exists 

The  third  general  criticism  which  your  Committee  makes  of 
our  present  system  is  that  nowhere,  either  in  the  Legislature  or 
outside,  is  there  now  ever  formulated  or  made  public  a  really 
complete  financial  plan  or  budget.  Such  a  budget,  as  it  is  univer- 
sally understood  in  communities  or  institutions  which  practice 
budget-making,  should  contain  the  following  essential  elements: 

(1)  A  responsible  estimate  of  the  proposed  expenditures  for 
the  coming  fiscal  year. 

(2)  Financial  statements  of  the  current  resources  and  liabili- 
ties of  the  State,  including  its  debts  and  various  funds,  and 
including,  for  the  purpose  of  comparison,  a  statement  of  its  cur- 
rent expenditures  and  revenues  in  past  years. 

(3)  A  proposition  of  the  new  measures  of  taxation,  if  any, 
which  will  be  necessary  to  meet  the  proposed  expenditures  of  the 
coming  year. 

To  see  how  far  short  we  fall  now  of  having  any  such  informa- 
tion available  it  is  only  necessary  to  recall  the  issue  which  arose 
last  winter  between  the  present  State  administration  and  its  pred- 
ecessor over  the  question  as  to  whether  a  direct  tax  of  $18,- 
000,000  was  needed.  When  it  is  recalled  how  difficult  it  was 
for  the  ordinary  citizen  to  determine  the  rights  of  a  controversy 
over  the  necessity  of  a  tax  amounting  to  nearly  thirty  per  cent, 
of  the  total  revenues  of  the  State,  one  can  form  some  conception 
of  the  confusion  of  our  present  methods  and  the  desirability  of  a 
complete  annual  budget  responsibly  prepared. 


11  Doc.  No.  32 


IV 


The  Necessity  of  Restrictions  Against  Additions  to  the 
Budget  on  the  Floor  After  it  is  Prepared 

The  fourth  general  criticism  which  your  Committee  makes  is 
that  there  is  no  restriction  now  imposed  against  additions  at  the 
behest  of  individual  members  being  made  to  the  budget  after  it 
is  formulated  and  proposed  by  its  framers.  Your  Committee  be- 
lieves that  the  absence  of  such  restriction  would  be  fatal  to  any 
budget  system.  The  spirit  of  mutual  accommodation  is  necessarily 
so  strong  between  members  of  all  legislative  bodies  that  without 
protection  against  its  effect  the  best  laid  program  of  financial 
expenditure  is  liable  to  destruction  on  the  floor  of  the  houses. 
Your  Committee  learned  of  an  instance  last  winter  where  an 
appropriation,  the  real  though  not  ostensible  purpose  of  which 
was  to  help  a  member  of  the  Legislature  to  re-election  in  his  own 
district,  after  it  had  been  rejected  by  the  Finance  Committee  of 
the  Senate,  was  forced  through  on  the  floor  of  that  body  by  the 
united  vote  of  both  parties,  the  Chairman  of  the  Finance  Com- 
mittee and  the  leader  of  the  minority  alone  voting  against  it. 

Restrictions  against  such  increases  or  additions  exist  in  the 
Legislatures  of  all  other  English  speaking  countries.  They  orig- 
inated in  the  oldest  standing  rule  of  order  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, dated  July  11,  1713,  which  forbids  that  body  to  raise  the 
amount  of  items  presented  in  the  budget.  Similar  restrictions 
exist  in  the  Constitution  of  the  Dominion  of  Canada  as  they  did 
in  the  Constitution  of  the  Southern  Confederacy.  They  are  a 
familiar  and  most  successful  feature  of  the  charters  of  all  the 
largest  cities  of  this  State  and  your  Committee  believes  they 
embody  a  principle  which  is  indispensable  to  successful  budget 
practice.     This  principle  has  been  stated  by  one  writer  as  follows: 

"  Upon  the  creation  of  just  such  a  situation  as  that  the  effi- 
ciency of  representative  government  depends.  Its  essential  prin- 
ciple is  to  fix  the  representatives  so  that  they  cannot  put  their 
hands  into  the  till ;  then  they  will  keep  a  good  watch  over  those 
who  do  handle  the  money.  Congressmen  will  take  a  very  differ- 
ent view  of  pork  barrels  from  that  now  held  when  they  can  no 
longer  help  themselves  to  the  pork."  (Ford  on  the  Cost  of  Our 
National  Government,  p.  115.) 


Doc.  No.  32  12 


The  Present  System  Reverses  the  Real  Relation  of  the 
Executive  to  the  Legislature  and  Surrenders  Impor- 
tant Powers  to  the  Executive 
Your  Committee  further  finds  that  the  system  of  permitting 
the  Governor  to  veto  items  in  appropriation  bills  prepared  by  the 
Legislature  has  resulted  in  transferring  to  the  Governor,  to  a 
large  extent,  the  historic  function  of  the  Legislature  of  holding 
the  purse  strings  of  the  State.  The  present  system  presents  a  sin- 
gular reversal  of  the  proper  relation  which  should  maintain  be- 
tween the  Executive  and  Legislature.  Instead  of  the  Executive 
coming  to  the  Legislature  with  a  request  for  funds,  which  it  is 
the  province  of  the  Legislature  to  pass  upon  and  either  grant  or 
refuse,  our  system  has  gradually  resulted  in  the  Legislature  pre- 
senting to  the  Executive  appropriation  bills  which  he  is  expected 
to  reduce.  Instead  of  the  man  who  is  to  spend  the  money  pre- 
senting to  the  body  which  is  to  grant  the  money  his  request  for 
their  final  decision,  the  latter  body,  in  substance,  draw  their  check 
in  blank  and  present  it  to  the  Executive  for  him  to  determine 
how  much  of  it  he  cares  to  use.  Your  Committee  finds  the  present 
system  has  resulted  in  the  Legislature,  under  pressure  of  local 
and  individual  interests,  passing  many  appropriation  bills  with 
larger  aggregate  than  they  believed  to  be  proper  in  reliance  upon 
the  hope  that  the  Governor  would  afterwards  prune  them  down 
to  the  proper  dimensions.  In  other  words,  our  attempt  to  ac- 
complish by  the  use  of  the  Executive  veto  what  elsewhere  has  been 
accomplished  by  the  legislative  rule  against  additions  to  the 
budget  mentioned  under  subdivision  IV  above,  has  very  nearly 
resulted  in  an  abandonment  to  the  Executive  of  the  priceless  legis- 
lative function  of  holding  the  purse.  Our  Legislatures,  instead  of 
placing  upon  themselves  during  their  own  deliberations,  a  self- 
denying  ordinance,  like  the  rule  of  the  House  of  Commons  above 
mentioned,  have  left  it  to  the  Governor  to  make  the  necessary  cor- 
rections afterwards. 

Not  only  is  our  system  an  abandonment  of  essential  legislative 
power,  but  it  is  open  to  other  grave  dangers  to  which  a  proper 
system  would  not  be  open.     Instead  of  presenting  his  budget  at 


13  Doc  Xo.  32 

the  beginning  of  the  session,  the  Governor  uses  his  veto  power 
after  the  session  is  over,  and  can  make  it  an  instrument  of  punish- 
ment or  reward.  Instead  of  presenting  a  public  plan  of  expend- 
itures and  revenue  which  can  be  subjected  to  the  fullest  publicity 
and  the  most  searching  scrutiny,  and  where  an  attempt  to  recom- 
mend expenditures  for  other  motives  than  the  interest  of  the 
State  as  a  whole  could  be  discovered  and  discussed,  the  Governor 
exercises  his  veto  power  in  a  series  of  disconnected  acts  under 
circumstances  which  make  such  discovery  less  easy. 

VI 

The  Present  System  Prevents  Any  Real  Defense  or 
Criticism  of  the  Budget  in  Public 

Finally,  as  a  result  of  our  present  method,  the  members  of  our 
Legislature  are  deprived  of  adequate  opportunity  to  ask  questions 
in  public  concerning  the  estimates  of  the  men  who  know  most 
about  them. 

In  those  communities  where  the  budget  is  presented  by  the 
Executive  to  the  Legislature,  it  follows  as  a  natural  matter  of 
course  that  the  men  who  have  prepared  the  estimates  and  the 
financial  program  present  themselves  personally  before  the  Legis- 
lature to  defend  and  to  be  examined  about  them.  The  Legislature 
thus  has  an  opportunity  to  learn  at  first  hand  the  propriety  of 
the  requests  which  are  made  and  to  cross-examine  the  men  who 
make  them  under  such  circumstances  that  the  public  can  get  a 
clear  conception  of  the  strength  and  the  weakness  of  any  pro- 
posed budget.  Such  a  method  of  public  criticism  can  accomplish 
results  which  are  quite  impossible  to  our  present  system  of  com- 
mittee work  which,  at  best,  is  conducted  without  effective 
publicity. 

Recommendations 
Your  Committee  has  prepared  and  presents  herewith  a  pro- 
posed amendment  which  embodies  its  recommendations,  made  for 
the  purpose  of  meeting  the  foregoing  defects  in  our  present  system 
and  of  providing  the  machinery  for  a  budget  system  in  the  State. 
Your  Committee  is  glad  to  report  that  on  many  of  its  conclusions 


Doc.  No.  32  14 

and  recommendations  its  members  were  unanimous  and  that  all 
such  recommendations,  after  having  received  careful  discussion, 
are  supported  by  a  large  majority  of  its  members. 

First. —  Estimates  must  be  first  revised  and  classified  within  the 
respective  departments 
Your  Committee  were  unanimous  in  their  belief  that  a  system 
should  be  introduced  which  would  compel  a  greater  sense  of 
responsibility  on  the  part  of  department  heads  in  submitting  there 
estimates  of  requirements.  Such  a  reform  will  be  greatly  facili- 
tated in  case  the  recommendations  of  the  Committee  on  Governor 
and  State  Officers  are  adopted  under  which  it  is  proposed  that 
the  various  bureaus,  commissions  and  offices  of  the  State  shall  be 
grouped  into  a  limited  number  of  departments  at  the  head  of 
each  of  which  shall  be  an  executive  chief.  The  amendment 
proposed  by  your  Committee  makes  it  the  duty  of  such  depart- 
ment head  to  classify  the  estimates  of  his  department  according 
to  his  judgment  of  their  relative  importance.  He  is  thus  made 
responsible  that  they  be  presented  in  such  a  way  that  any  subse- 
quent pruning  can  be  done  with  intelligence.  This  duty  of  class- 
ification will  necessarily  tend  to  make  the  head  of  each  department 
better  acquainted  with  the  needs  of  his  various  bureaus  and 
subordinates  and  will  tend,  in  the  opinion  of  your  Committee,  to 
increase  the  responsibility  which  such  department  head  will  feel 
as  to  his  estimates. 

Second. —  The  estimates  should  then  be  revised  and  co-ordinated 
by  a  central  executive  authority 
Your  Committee  were  unanimous  in  believing  that  these  de- 
partmental estimates  should  be  revised  by  a  central  executive 
authority  before  transmission  to  the  Legislature.  This  is  the 
nub  of  a  real  budget  system.  It  means  that  that  executive  au- 
thority must  be  responsible  for  preparing  and  completing  a  con- 
sistent plan  for  the  proposed  expenditures  of  the  State  under 
which  those  proposed  expenditures  will  be  brought  into  proper 
relation  to  the  expected  revenues.  It  means  that  some  central 
authority  on  the  executive  side  of  the  government  must  take  the 
responsibility  of  cutting  down  the  estimates  which  are  too  high, 


15  Doc.  No.  32 

of  deciding  between  those  which  are  conflicting,  and  of  recom- 
mending an  aggregate  which  will  bear  a  proper  relation  to  the 
revenues;  it  means  the  introduction  of  a  system  of  planning  and 
foresight  where  none  now  exists. 

Third. — This  central  authority  of  revision  should  be  the  Governor 
The  very  great  majority  of  your  Committee  are  of  the  opinion 
that  this  ultimate  responsibility  of  revising  the   estimates   and 
preparing  the  budget  must  rest  with  the  Governor. 

(a)  Upon  him  rests  the  constitutional  duty  of  seeing  that  the 
laws  are  enforced.  The  departments  whose  estimates  comprise 
by  far  the  greater  portion  of  the  budget  are  the  instruments 
through  which  he  performs  that  constitutional  duty.  His  rela- 
tion to  them  is  such  as  to  make  it  his  duty  to  constantly  and 
naturally  receive  information  as  to  their  functions  and  puts  him 
in  a  position  to  exercise  that  supervision  over  their  co-operation 
and  team  work  which  is  absolutely  necessary  for  economy.  He 
is  the  man  who  can  insist  that  a  given  department  shall  do  its 
work  with  less  money  or  decide  between  several  departments 
which  is  to  be  given  the  preference  in  respect  to  available  rev- 
enues. He  is  the  man  who,  under  the  present  system,  though  less 
effectively,  makes  a  similar  decision  when  he  prunes  the  appro- 
priation bills  with  his  veto. 

(b)  Secondly,  as  the  head  of  the  State  he  is  the  one  who  can 
best  explain  and  defend  a  given  fiscal  policy  to  the  people  of  the 
State  and  he  is  the  one  who,  above  all  others,  is  interested  in 
upholding  before  the  people  of  the  State  a  policy  of  economy  and 
who  should  be  held  responsible  to  them  for  the  success  or  failure 
of  such  a  policy. 

Fourth. —  Objections  to  a  board  of  revision 
ISTo  board  composed  of  several  co-ordinate  members  could  per- 
form these  functions  with  equal  efficiency.     The  necessary  author- 
ity over  subordinates  would  be  absent  and  the  sense  of  responsi- 
bility would  be  diminished. 

(a)  The  state  has  already  made  such  an  experiment  with  a 
board  of  estimate  created  under  chapter  281  of  the  Laws  of  1913, 
and  the  defects   above  mentioned   caused   its   complete   failure. 


Doc.  Xo.  32  16 

The  board  there  created  was  composed  of  the  Governor,  Lieuten- 
ant-Governor, President  and  Chairman  of  the  Finance  Committee 
of  the  Senate,  Speaker  and  Chairman  of  the  Ways  and  Means 
Committee  of  Assembly,  Comptroller,  Attorney-General  and  Com- 
missioner of  Efficiency  and  Economy.  It  was  thus  composed  of 
four  legislative  and!  five  executive  members,  and  violated  the 
principle  above  referred  to,  which  requires  that  the  function  of 
proposing  a  budget  should  be  separated  ^  a  the  function  of 
disposing  of  it  and  that  the  former  should  belong  to  the  Executive 
and  the  latter  to  the  Legislature.  Although  the  board  under 
the  statute  was  ostensibly  given  ample  power  for  the  preparation 
and  revision  of  estimates,  it  at  once  became  deadlocked  and  was 
unable  to  agree.  It  failed  wholly  to  formulate  definite  proposals 
and  never  succeeded  in  proposing  any  budget  to  the  Legislature. 
It  was  shortly  abolished  by  statute.  Its  fate  amply  demonstrated 
the  error  of  confusing  instead  of  defining  responsibility. 

(b)  It  has  been  suggested  to  the  Committee  that  the  Comp- 
troller and  the  Attorney-General  should  share  with  the  Governor 
this  responsibility  in  the  matter  of  revising  the  estimates.  Your 
Committee  believes  that  the  Comptroller  should  be  consulted  in 
respect  to  the  budget  but  should  not  be  committed  to  it  in  advance. 
He  is  the  auditing  officer  of  the  State.  His  services  should  be  at 
the  disposal  of  the  Legislature  in  criticising  and  disposing  of 
the  budget.  If  the  Comptroller  were  made  a  memeber  of  a 
budget  board  he  would  be  committed'  to  that  budget  and  his 
subsequent  criticism  would  be  foreclosed  and  useless. 

The  amendment  which  your  Committee  submits,  therefore, 
provides  that  the  Comptroller  shall  receive  a  copy  of  the  budget 
and  that  he  shall  have  an  opportunity  thereafter  to  present  his 
views  in  regard  to  it  before  the  Legislature.  This  we  believe 
to  be  the  true  function  which  he  should  play. 

As  to  the  Attorney-General,  your  Committee  wholly  Pails  to 
what  services  he  could  render  in  the  revision  of  the  estimates. 
He  is  not  a  financial  officer;  lie  is  net  the  superior  of  the  depart- 
ments who  render  the  estimates,  and  fco  impose  upon  him  such  a 
duty  would  simply  be  an  interference  with  his  functions  as  chief 
law  officer  of  the  State  and  would  impose  a  useless  burden  upon 
him. 


17  Doc.  No.  32 

Fifth. —  Public  hearings  upon  the  budget 
The  amendment  submitted  by  your  Committee  provides  that 
the  Governor  shall  give  public  hearings  upon  the  estimates  at 
which  he  may  require  the  attendance  of  department  heads  and 
their  subordinates.  The  purpose  of  your  Committee  is  to  make  the 
function  of  revision  of  the  estimates  as  public  as  possible.  This  will 
minimize  the  danger  of  unfairness  of  allotment  between  the 
different  activities  ,'the  State  and  will  give  an  opportunity  for 
public  information  and  criticism. 

Sixth. —  Estimates  of  Legislature  and  judiciary 
The  Governor's  power  of  revision  should,  in  the  opinion  of 
your  Committee,  not  be  extended  over  the  estimates  of  the  legis- 
lative and  judicial  branches  of  the  State. 

Under  your  Committee's  amendment  such  estimates  are  pre- 
pared by  those  branches  and  transmited  to  the  Governor.  They 
necessarily  form  an  integral  part  of  the  budget  or  plan  of  ex- 
penditures for  the  ensuing  year  but  the  Governor  is  given  no 
power  to  revise  or  reduce  them  and  may  simply  present  them  to 
the  Legislature  with  such  recommendations  in  respect  to  them  as 
he  may  be  advised.  lie,  however,  retains  his  present  power  of 
veto  over  these  estimates. 

Seventh. —  Submission  cf  budget  to  Legislature 
The  budget,  when  completed  by  the  Governor,  must  be  sub- 
mitted to  the  Legislature  on  or  before  the  first  of  February.     It 
must  contain  all  of  the  elements  above  specified. 

Your  Committee  believes  that  the  essentials  of  a  complete 
budget  should  be  so  carefully  prescribed  in  the  Constitution  that 
there  will  be  no  danger  of  the  system  failing  from  lack  of  an 
adequate  standard  to  which  future  administrations  must  conform. 
The  experience  of  some  cities  of  the  State  justifies  this  precaution. 
We  believe  that  the  elements  enumerated  in  the  proposed  amend1 
ment  contain  such  requisites. 

Your  Committee  believes  that  it  is  essential  that  the  budget 
should  be  presented  as  early  as  possible  in  the  session  and,  after 
careful  investigation,  believes  that  the  first  of  February  will  give 
the  Governor  time  for  its  preparation  and  yet  allow  it  to  reach 
the  Legislature  in  time  for  full  discussion. 


Doc.  No.  32  18 

Eighth. — Appearance  of  Governor,  Comptroller  and  heads  of 
departments  before  the  Legislature 
Under  the  proposed  amendment  these  officers  are  to  have  the 
right  and  be  subject  to  the  duty,  when  requested  by  either  house, 
to  appear  and  be  heard  and  to  answer  inquiries  relative  to  the 
budget.  In  order  to  provide  for  a  proper,  permanent  and 
dignified  system  for  such  appearance,  it  is  made  the  duty  of  the 
Legislature  to  provide  for  the  necessary  procedure  by  law.  This 
right  and  duty  of  appearance  follows  as  a  necessary  corollary  of 
the  budget  system.  Where  such  a  budget  is  prepared  by  one  branch 
of  the  government  and  submitted  to  another,  it  necessarily  carries 
with  it  the  right  to  be  heard  and  the  duty  to  submit  to  interroga- 
tion with  reference  to  the  measures  which  are  thus  proposed.  It 
follows  the  natural  method  by  which  men  in  all  the  affairs  of  life 
dispose  of  such  an  issue,  namely,  by  meeting  face  to  face  in 
discussion  and  interrogation.  It  also  insures  that  the  plans  of  the 
Governor,  embodied  in  the  budget,  will  receive  essential  publicity 
and  criticism  on  the  part  of  the  State.  If  the  budget  has  been 
unfair  to  any  department  or  bureau,  it  provides  a  means  by  which 
that  fact  can  be  made  public.  If  there  should  be  any  issue  be- 
tween the  Governor  and  the  Legislature  as  to  proper  eeonomy 
or  adequate  expenditure,  it  insures  that  this  issue  will  be  discussed 
in  a  deliberative  forum,  under  parliamentary  rules,  instead  of  as 
now,  merely  upon  the  stump  and  in  the  press.  It  affords  an  in- 
valuable opportunity  by  which  the  people's  representatives,  with- 
out the  expense,  excitement  and  necessary  hostility  of  special  in- 
vestigations into  departments,  may  keep  themselves  informed  as 
to  the  financial  working  of  every  branch  of  the  State  government. 
For  these  reasons  "Question  Day"  in  the  Llouse  of  Commons 
has  been  called  the  center  of  gravity  of  the  British  constitution. 
(See  Cambridge  Modern  History,  Vol.  VI,  pp.  810-811). 

Ninth. — Relation   of  the    Governor's   budget    to   oilier  financial 
legislation 

Your  Committee  has  very  carefully  considered  this  difficult 
question.  On  the  one  hand,  it  is  essential  to  the  success  of  the 
whole  system  that  the  Governor's  budget,  when  presented,  be  given 
a  fair  trial  and  that  it  bo  considered  on  its  merits  without  the  easy 


19  Doc.  No.  32 

temptation  to  the  Legislature  to  throw  it  aside  and  begin  over 
again  a  new  budget  of  its  own ;  on  the  other  hand  your  Committee 
believes  that,  particularly  when  a  new  system  is  thus  being  intro- 
duced, the  Legislature  should  retain  not  only  adequate  power  to 
correct  executive  abuses,  but  the  right  to  initiate  financial  legis- 
lation by  methods  which  will  not  disrupt  the  budget. 

The  amendment  which  your  Committee  presents,  therefore,  pro- 
vides that  the  Legislature,  in  acting  upon  the  budget,  may  reduce 
or  strike  out  but  not  raise  the  items  therein.  It  thereby  applies 
to  the  proposed  bill  the  old  self-denying  ordinance  of  parlia- 
mentary procedure  above  mentioned.  To  leave  in  the  Legislature 
the  right  to  raise  those  items  would,  as  your  Committee  believes, 
leave  the  door  open  to  an  entire  abandonment  of  the  system  and 
an  immediate  return  to  present  methods  and  would  also  tend  to 
destroy  all  incentive  on  the  part  of  the  Governor  to  prepare  the 
budget  carefully  in  advance  and  present  it  with  a  sense  of  respon- 
sibility. But  to  meet  the  objection  that  the  Governor  might  misuse 
his  power  and  either  starve  objects  which  the  Legislature  deems 
worthy  or  trade  with  individuals  or  localities,  the  power  of  initi- 
ation of  financial  legislation  is  left  with  the  Legislature  subject 
to  but  two  restrictions : 

(1)  It  must  not  be  exercised  until  after  the  budget  is  disposed 
of  by  both  houses  ;  and 

(2)  Such  appropriations  must  be  made  by  separate  bills,  each 
for  a  single  work  or  object. 

We  believe  that  this  will  adequately  protect  the  budget  system 
and  yet  keep  it  free  from  executive  abuse.  A  Governor  sincerely 
devoted  to  economy  will  have  the  opportunity  to  present  a  com- 
plete financial  plan,  drawn  in  the  sole  interest  of  the  State  at 
large.  lie  will  have  all  the  aid  which  public  presentation  and 
discussion  can  give  him  in  presenting  that  plan  to  the  Legislature. 
The  Legislature  must  approach  it  in  the  spirit  of  a  fair  critic  and 
not  of  a  rival  constructor  and  yet,  if  individual' abuses  have  crept 
into  the  budget,  they  can  be  remedied.  The  Legislature  is  left 
free  to  inaugurate  new  State  activities,  provided  it  does  them  in 
the  mannner  prescribed.  By  postponing  such  additional  legislation 
until  after  the  budget  has  been  acted  on  both  the  State  and  its 
representatives  in  the  Legislature  will  have  opportunity  to  fully 


Doc.  No.  32  20 

know  all  the  revenue  available,  if  any,  beyond  the  regular  depart- 
mental expenses. 

We  believe  that  this  proposal  will  enlist  in  the  working  out  of 
this  problem  all  of  the  probabilities  for  success  which  can  come 
through  publicity  and  a  sense  of  responsibility  on  both  the  ex- 
ecutive and  legislative  branches  of  the  government.  It  also  fol- 
lows closely  all  of  the  lines  of  precedent  which  successful  budgets 
in  other  communities  and  institutions  have  followed  in  the  past. 

Tenth. —  Fiscal  Year.  Expiration  of  Appropriations 
Your  Committee  further  believes  that  the  beginning  of  the 
State's  fiscal  year  should  be  moved  forward  to  July  1,  with  a  view 
to  bringing  the  period  to  be  financed  closer  to  the  time  during 
which  the  estimates  and  budget  for  that  period  must  be  made. 
This  change  would  put  the  termination  of  the  year  to  be  planned 
for  three  months  nearer  to  the  time  when  the  plans  are  made 
than  it  is  under  the  present  system  and  by  so  much  would  facilitate 
more  accurate  forecast.  Finally,  we  believe  that  the  expiration  of 
appropriations  from  time  to  time,  two  years  from  the  date  of 
their  enactment,  causes  great  and  unnecessary  confusion.  It  is 
therefore  proposed  that  hereafter  all  appropriations  shall  expire 
three  months  after  the  end  of  a  fiscal  year.  This  would  make 
all  appropriations  expire  simultaneously,  and  yet  would  give  time 
to  permit  the  payment  of  any  bills  accruing  late  in  the  preceding 
fiscal  year. 

BRIEF  SUMMARY  OF  OBJECTIONS  AND  ANSWERS 
1.  The  fear  that  the  proposed  budget  system  would  deprive  the 
Legislature  of  power  or  dignity  is,  we  believe,  a  complete  miscon- 
ception. On  the  contrary,  the  Legislature  would  be  restricted 
only  to  the  extent  of  being  protected  from  disrupting  intluences 
while  considering  the  budget.  It  would  retain  power  of  initiation 
thereafter;  and  in  addition,  it  would  be  restored  to  its  lost  position 
of  dignified  and  effective  control  over  appropriations. 

Under  present  methods,  financial  legislation  has  been  in  danger 
of  degenerating  into  a  scramble  for  local  favors  and  privilege;  tin' 
proposed  system  makes  it  possible  for  the  Legislature  to  consider 
from  a  State-wide  viewpoint  the  broader  financial  interests  o(  the 
State. 


21  Doc.  No.  32 

Under  present  methods  the  Legislature  has  been  gradually  sur- 
rendering its  most  vital  power  in  financial  legislation  to  the  execu- 
tive veto.  The  proposed  system  will  restore  that  power  and  make 
it  final. 

2.  Nor  is  there  the  slightest  force  to  the  claim  that  the  proposed 
system  would  give  undue  power  to  the  Governor.  It  would  add 
not  one  iota  to  the  power  that  he  now  possesses  through  the  veto  of 
items  in  the  appropriation  bills.  Whereas  now  that  power  is  sub- 
ject to  no  review  and  thus  may  be  used  as  an  instrument  of  reward 
or  punishment  after  the  legislative  session  is  over,  the  proposed 
system  would  deprive  him  of  his  veto  as  to  budget  items  and  would 
thus  compel  him  to  use  his  influence  in  advance,  in  the  open,  under 
the  fire  of  legislative  discussion  and  the  scrutiny  of  the  entire 
State.  It  would  thus  be  the  Legislature  which  would  have  the 
final  word. 

3.  Of  even  less  weight,  in  the  opinion  of  your  Committee,  are 
the  objections  sometimes  urged  that  the  Governor,  and  especially 
a  new  Governor,  would  not  have  time  to  prepare  a  budget.  It  is 
believed  that  the  burden  would  be  lighter  than  under  the  present 
system  under  which  the  Governor  must  prune  the  appropriations 
within  thirty  days  after  the  session,  under  all  the  added  pressure 
of  reviewing  some  five  hundred  other  bills  and  without  any  of  the 
assistance  of  the  previous  classification  by  department  heads  for 
which  the  proposed  amendment  provides. 

Doubtless  the  burden  would  be  heaviest  on  a  new  executive. 
But  it  is  the  familiar  practice  of  each  new  administration  in  our 
first  and  second  class  cities  to  rely,  to  a  large  extent,  upon  its 
predecessor  for  its  first  budget.  There  is  no  break  in  government 
and  the  system  is  successful,  as  we  believe  it  would  be  in  the  State 
government.  The  lengthening  of  the  Governor's  term  from  two  to 
four  years  would  greatly  aid  the  efficient  and  intelligent  prepara- 
tion of  budgets. 

Undoubtedly  in  budget  making  as  in  virtually  all  other  execu- 
tive work,  much  of  the  work  of  investigation  and  comparison 
would  fall  to  subordinates.  But  in  view  of  the  growing  importance 
of  the  issue  of  economy  and  the  probability  of  a  direct  tax  for 
many  years  to  come,  no  Governor  could  afford  to  shirk  or  delegate 
the  ultimate  decision.  On  the  contrary,  he  would  have  a  new  and 
vital  incentive  to  study  the  machinery  of  the  State.     He  could 


Doc.  No.  32  22 

not  risk  the  sure  discovery  of  ignorance  or  neglect.  He  would 
be  under  a  new  compulsion  to  devise  systematic  and  rational 
methods  of  saving,  for  on  him  would  squarely  fall,  as  it  should, 
the  responsibility  for  extravagance  and  to  him  would  be  given  as 
never  before  due  credit  for  wise  economy. 

4.  AVe  have  already  enumerated  some  of  the  reasons  which 
require  and  justify  the  presence  of  the  heads  of  executive 
departments  and  the  government  on  the  floor  of  the  -Houses  of  the 
Legislature  in  order  to  defend  and  answer  inquiries  about  the 
budget.  Critics  of  the  budget  system  have  assailed  such  a  pro- 
ceeding as  novel  and  un-American.  To  answer  such  criticism  it  is 
only  sufficient  to  remind  the  Convention  that  this  procedure  was 
practiced  by  the  first  national  administration  of  this  country  under 
President  Washington  and  his  cabinet  officers ;  that  it  has  been  in- 
troduced by  an  American  Congress  into  the  governments  now  in 
force  in  Porto  Kico  and  the  Philippine  Islands;  that  it  is  a  sys- 
tem in  practice  before  the  local  legislatures  of  many  of  the  largest 
cities  of  this  State;  and  that  it  was  strongly  advocated  by  Justice 
Story  in  his  Commentaries  on  the  Constitution,  and  that  it  has 
since  been  earnestly  recommended  by  a  long  line  of  American 
statesmen,  including  Presidents  Taft  and  Wilson,  and  Senators 
George  H.  Pendleton,  James  G.  Blaine,  John  J.  Ingalls,  W.  B. 
Allison,  O.  H.  Piatt,  Elihu  Root  and  James  W.  Wadsworth,  Jr. 
A  practice  recommended  by  such  precedents  and  such  authorities 
cannot  be  justly  criticised  as  un-American. 

In  concluding,  your  Committee  fully  recognizes  the  difficulty  of 
the  subject  and  the  responsibility  involved  in  suggesting  changes, 
no  matter  how  well  supported  by  authority  and  experience,  into 
any  system  rooted  in  long-accustomed  usage.  But  it  has  been  fori  i- 
fied  in  its  conclusions  by  recent  investigations  in  other  States, 
notably  Minnesota,  Iowa  and  Illinois,  which  resulted  in  recom- 
mendations essentially  similar  to  those  here  made.  It  believes  that 
the  system  which  it  advocates  would  make  possible  in  this  State  a 
much  needed  adjustment  of  expenditures  to  revenues,  and  thai  it 
would  bring  into  the  finances  of  Xcw  York  simple  and  common 
sense  principles  long  familiar  and  admittedly  indispensable  in  the 
affairs  of  everyday  American  business. 

Respectfully  submitted  for  the  Committee, 

1IKXKY  L  ST  I  M  SOX, 

Chairman. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  33 


REPORT  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  CANALS,  RELATIVE 
TO  PROPOSED  AMENDMENT  No.  779  (Int.  No.  710) 


August  4,   1915 

Mr.  Clinton,  from  the  Committee  on  Canals,  reported  by  pro- 
posed amendment  entitled  lt  Proposed  constitutional  amendment 
to  amend;  Section  eight  of  Article  VII  of  the  Constitution  "  (Int. 
Xo.  710),  which  was  read  twice  and  said  Committee  reports  in 
favor  of  the  passage  of  the  same. 

which  report  was  agreed  to,  and  said  proposed  amendment  ordered 
printed  and  referred  to  the  Committee  of  the  Whole. 

Mr.  Clinton,  from  the  Committee  on  Canals,  submitted  the 
following  statement  of  the  reasons  for  the  proposal  to  amend: 

The  approaching  completion  of  the  Barge  canal  improvement 
has  made  it  necessary  to  amend  Section  8  of  Article  VII  by  de- 
fining the  canals  to  which  the  prohibition  against  sale,  lease  and 
other  disposal  in  the  present  Constitution,  applies.  The  reten- 
tion of  the  language  now  in  the  Constitution  might  possibly  lead 
to  a  misconstruction,  it  at  least  would  leave  the  intent  open  to 
misinterpretation.  In  addition  to  this,  questions  have  arisen 
heretofore  in  the  courts,  as  to  what  properties  used  in  connection 
with  the  canals  were  to  be  considered  parts  of  them  so  as  to  be 


Doc.  Xo.  33  2 

within  the  prohibition  against  sale,  etc.  The  Committee  has 
therefore  added  to  the  language  of  the  Constitution,  clauses 
which  are  intended  to  include  within  the  prohibition,  canal  termi- 
nals the  Erie,  the  Oswego,  the  Champlain  and  the  Cayuga  and 
Seneca  canal,  as  the  same  will  be  improved  and  become  part  of 
the  Barge  canal  system,  at  the  same  time  preserving  the  applica- 
tion of  the  prohibition  to  the  Black  River  canal.  Language  has 
been  used  which  saves  as  a  portion  of  the  Barge  canal  system, 
those  parts  of  the  existing  canals  which  have  been  preserved  as  a 
part  of  that  system  by  existing  statutes,  which  are  either  amend- 
ments to  the  laws  under  which  the  Barge  canals  are  being  con- 
structed, or  separate  statutes.  The  parts  so  preserved  are,  in 
some  instances,  needed  auxiliaries  as  terminals  or  to  connect  with 
the  Barge  canals,  manufacturing  localities  which  would  otherwise 
be  cut  off  from  direct  connection  with  the  improved  canals.  These 
are  not  many  and  do  not  impose  upon  the  State  the  maintenance 
of  any  considerable  portion  of  the  old  canals. 

In  addition  to  the  parts  preserved  by  existing  statutes  the 
Committee,  after  careful  consideration,  has  concluded  that  the 
existing  inland  Erie  canal  from  Tonawanda  creek  to  connection 
with  the  Black  Bock  Harbor,  and  canal  slips  1  and  2  in  the  <  'it \ 
of  Buffalo  should  be  made  a  part  of  the  Barge  canal  system,  even 
though  not  enlarged  to  Barge  canal  capacity  at  present.  Slips 
1  and  2  in  the  City  of  Buffalo  are  needed  for  terminal  purposes 
and  should  not  be  abandoned;  and  the  inland  Erie  canal  from 
Tonawanda  creek  to  Black  Bock  Harbor,  your  Committee  is  de- 
cidedly of  the  opinion,  should  be  saved  as  a  part  of  that  system 
in  order  to  enable  west  bound  boats  with  partinl  cargoes  or 
without  cargoes  to  reach  Buffalo  front  Tonawanda  creek  witboul 
proceeding  up  Niagara  Biver  against  the  heavy  current. 

Under  existing  statutes  the  present  Erie  canal  is  preserved 
from  Rome  to  Mohawk  passing  through  the  City  of  1'iica.  This 
was  done  because  the  Barge  canal  passes  so  far  to  the  North  <>\' 
the  manufacturing  districts  in  that  city  that  the  expense  to 
manufacturers  of  shipping  by  the  Barge  canal  would  be  greatly 
increased  if  connection  by  the  existing  Erie  canal,  both  east  and 
west,  were  not  retained.  However,  the  saving  <>(  this  pari  of  the 
Erie  canal  in  the  City  of  Utica  prevents  the  improvement  of  the 


3  Doc.  No.  33 

grade  of  the  city  streets  at  and  in  the  vicinity  of  bridges  crossing 
the  canal.  To  relieve  the  municipal  conditions  and  at  the  same 
time  to  save  for  the  manufacturing  industries,  connection  with 
the  Barge  canal  through  the  existing  Erie  canal,  your  Committee 
haa  deemed  it  wise  to  insert  language  in  the  proposed  amendment 
which  will  permit  the  present  Erie  canal  between  Schuyler  and 
Third  streets  in  Ctica  to  be  disposed  of  on  condition  that  a  How 
of  sufficient  water  from  Schuyler  to  Third  streets  be  maintained, 
as  may  be  done  by  means  of  pipes  or  other  conduits.  This 
proposed  amendment  protects  the  manufacturing  industries  and 
will  permit  the  lowering  of  the  bridges  and  the  street  grades. 

In  view  of  the  approaching  completion  of  the  Barge  canal 
system,  efforts  have  been  made,  and  will  continue  to  be  made,  to 
secure  portions  of  the  canals  which  may  be  abandoned  for  par- 
ticular municipal  and  private  purposes.  In  the  opinion  of  your 
Committee  this  practice  should  be  stopped  as  the  result  must  be, 
if  it  be  allowed  to  continue,  that  abandonment  will  not  be  properly 
safeguarded  and  the  State  will  not  receive  proper  compensation. 
Your  Committee  has  therefore  proposed  an  amendment  to  the 
effect  that  abandonment,  sale  or  other  disposition  of  canals  or 
canal  property  which  shall  cease  to  be  a  portion  of  the  canal  system 
of  the  State  shall  be,  pursuant  to  general  laws,  only,  which  shall 
secure  to  the  State  the  fair  value  of  the  property. 

Question  having  arisen  under  a  recent  decision  of  the  Court 
of  Appeals  as  to  what  the  title  of  the  State  to  property  appro- 
priated to  canal  purposes  is,  your  Committee  has  deemed  it  wise 
to  propose  an  amendment  that  announces  that  title  to  be  in  fee. 

.Maintenance  of  the  supply  of  water  for  the  canals,  to  protect 
commerce  and  navigation,  and  control  over  the  flow  of  water  in 
the  prisms  and  channels,  is  paramount  to  the  use  of  canal  waters 
for  any  other  purpose.  Nevertheless,  in  certain  localities  and 
under  certain  circumstances  (dependent  upon  the  supply  of  water) 
there  is  at  times  more  water  than  is  needed  for  navigation,  the  use 
of  which  for  power  purposes  can  be  permitted,  subject  to  such  con- 
trol as  will  prevent  creation  of  currents  which  will  be  impediments 
to  navigation.  This  has  been  recognized  heretofore  and  leases  have 
been  granted  for  the  use  of  surplus  waters  which  in  their  operation 
have  been  exceedingly  detrimental  and  which  have  not  com- 
pensated the  State  fairly  for  supplying  the  waters  to  the  lease- 


Doc.  No.  33  4 

holders.  Your  Committee  has  therefore  deemed  it  necessary,  for 
the  protection  of  the  State,  to  propose  an  amendment  permitting 
the  leasing  of  surplus  waters  provided  that  the  use  thereof  shall 
not  in  any  way  injure,  impair,  interfere  with,  or  endanger  navi- 
gation or  the  construction,  use,  maintenance,  operation,  the  safety 
of  I  he  canals  or  of  other  property  of  the  State.  Your  Committee 
has  deemed  it  wise  that  no  lease  shall  be  granted  in  perpetuity  and 
that  there  shall  be  reserved  to  the  State  the  right,  whenever  in 
the  opinion  of  those  having  charge  of  the  management  and  opera- 
tion of  the  canals,  the  needs  of  navigation  required  to  terminate 
or  suspend  the  same  and  to  regulate  and  alter  the  amount  of 
water  to  be  used  thereunder. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  34 


REPORT   OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  CHARITIES,  RELA- 
TIVE TO  PROPOSED  AMENDMENT  No.  378  (Int.  No. 

371) 


August  5,  1915 

Mr.  Wadsworth,  from  the  Committee  on  Charities,  presented 
the  following  memorandum: 

To  the  Delegates  to  the  Constitutional  Convention: 

The  Committee  on  Charities  of  the  Constitutional  Convention 
desires  to  call  your  attention  to  the  provisions  of  the  enclosed 
amendment  CEo.  378,  Int.  No.  371),  introduced  by  Mr.  Stein- 
brink,  and  hereby  reported  for  your  favorable  consideration. 

The  importance  of  the  department  for  the  insane  is  shown  by  the 
fact  that  it  includes  14  hospitals,  over  33,000  patients,  6,000  em- 
ployees and  200  medical  officers.  The  appropriations  necessary 
for  caring  for  the  insane  and  providing  for  their  proper  accommo- 
dation during  the  next  fiscal  year  amount  to  approximately  eight 
and  one-half  million  dollars.  The  total  number  of  admissions  to 
the  hospitals  during  the  last  fiscal  year  amounted  to  7,056  and 
the  discharges  to  7,264.  The  average  annual  increase  in  popula- 
tion has  amounted  to  about  800  patients  during  the  last  fifteen 
years.  This  is  now  the  largest  undertaking  of  a  medical  and 
curative  nature  maintained  by  any  government  in  the  world,  and 
by  the  time  of  the  next  Constitutional  Convention  the  population  of 


Doc.  No.  31  2 

the  hospitals  will  undoubtedly  reach  50,000  or  60,000  and  the 
number  of  employees  10,000. 

The  accompanying  proposal  amends  Section  11  of  Article  VI II 
of  the  present  Constitution  and  continues  "  a  state  commission  in 
lunacy  in  which  shall  remain  the  management  and  fiscal  control  of 
the  state  hospitals  for  the  insane  (not  including  institutions  for 
criminals  and  convicts)  except  insofar  as  such  management  may 
now  or  hereafter  be  delegated  by  the  legislature  to  local  boards  of 
managers." 

Section  11,  as  it  reads  at  present,  authorizes  the  State  Commis- 
sion in  Lunacy  to  visit  and  inspect  all  institutions  either  public 
or  private  used  for  the  care  and  treatment  of  the  insane  (not 
including  institutions  for  epileptics  or  idiots). 

Section  13  of  the  Constitution  of  1891  provided  that  "  existing 
laws  relating  to  institutions  referred  to  in  the  foregoing  sections 
and  to  their  supervision  and  inspection,  insofar  as  such  laws  are 
not  inconsistent  with  the  provisions  of  the  Constitution,  shall  re- 
main in  force  until  amended  or  repealed  by  the  Legislature."  This 
section  indicates  that  the  Constitution  of  1894  intended  to  recog- 
nize not  only  the  power  of  the  Commission  to  visit  and  inspect  in- 
stitutions for  the  insane,  but  fully  recognized  the  financial  control 
Of  the  institutions  conferred  upon  the  Commission  by  the  Legisla- 
ture in  1893  and  the  general  administrative  jurisdiction  over  the 
hospitals  authorized  by  other  statutes. 

The  Commission  in  Lunacy  has  had  entire  administrative  and 
financial  control  of  the  State  hospitals  for  the  insane  since  L893. 
You  will  observe  that  the  provisions  of  the  proposed  amendment 
as  submitted  by  this  Committee  merely  continue  the  powers  con- 
ferred upon  the  Commission  in  Lunacy  by  the  Legislature  prior 
to  the  amendments  of  1891  and  recognized  in  the  Constitution  at 
that  time.  Your  Committee,  after  careful  study  of  the  administra- 
tion of  the  hospitals  for  the  insane,  is  firmly  of  the  opinion  thai 
the  present  methods  of  management  and  control  should  be  con- 
tinued and  should  he  (dearly  defined  in  the  Constitution.  The 
hospitals  for  the  insane  should  be  kept  entirely  onl  of  the  domain 
of  politics  and  should  not  be  liable  to  radical  changes  which,  at 
the  present   time,  may  be  made  at   any  session  of  the   Legislature. 

As  a  result  of  several  public  hearings  held  by  the  Committee, 


3  Doc.  No.  34 

and  investigations  by  sub-committees,  and  numerous  communica- 
tions which  have  been  received  from  the  friends  and  relatives  of 
patients  in  the  hospitals  for  the  insane,  it  is  convinced  that  those 
who  are  most  concerned  in  the  welfare  of  the  hospitals  are 
unanimously  opposed  to  any  change  in  the  present  methods  of  ad- 
ministration. The  public  hearings  held  by  this  Committee  were 
attended  by  members  of  the  boards  of  managers  of  all  the  hos- 
pitals, superintendents  of  a  number  of  these  institutions  as  well 
as  representatives  of  various  charitable,  medical  and  other  organi- 
zations. The  Committee  has  also  consulted  many  other  acknowl- 
edged authorities  familiar  with  the  affairs  of  the  institutions  and 
the  history  of  the  hospital  service,  and  finds  that  their  views  are 
fully  in  accord  with  those  already  expressed  by  us. 

After  a  careful  investigation  of  the  subject  this  expression  of 
views  would  seem  to  voice  the  sentiments  of  the  entire  people  of 
the  State. 

While  various  propositions  relating  to  the  administration  of  the 
hospitals  and  charitable  institutions  of  the  State  have  been  sub- 
mitted to  this  Committee,  we  are  of  the  opinion  that  the  amend- 
ment which  we  are  recommending  for  your  approval  is  the  only 
one  which  should  be  contemplated  at  this  time. 

In  addition  to  the  duties  mentioned  above,  the  Commission  in 
Lunacy  also  inspects  at  least  twice  a  year  the  institutions  for  in- 
sane criminals  and  convicts  as  well  as  twenty-four  licensed  private 
institutions. 

An  evidence  of  the  standards  maintained  by  this  Department  is 
shown  by  the  recent  award  by  an  international  jury  at  the  Panama- 
Pacific  Exposition  of  the  highest  prize  to  the  State  hospitals  of 
New    York. 

The  economical  administration  in  the  expenditure  of  these 
funds  appears  from  the  fact  that  the  average  annual  per  capita  cost 
of  maintenance  of  the  insane  in  the  hospitals  was  only  $208.91 
during  the  last  fiscal  year,  or,  in  other  words,  fifty-seven  cents  per 
day. 

The  entire  care  of  the  insane  was  undertaken  by  the  State  in 
1889,  at  which  time  there  was  an  insane  population  in  the  hos- 
pitals of  1G,000.     Since  then  it  has  grown  to  33,000. 


Doc.  No.  34  4 

The  magnitude  of  this  undertaking  as  shown  by  these  figures 
is  such  as  to  clearly  indicate  the  inadvisability  of  combining  this 
Department  with  any  other.  Consolidation  without  beneficial  re- 
sult is  folly.  To  consolidate  merely  to  promote  an  idea  is  without 
sound  reason.  Where  a  department  or  branch  of  government  has 
attained  a  point  of  efficiency  which  marks  the  apex  in  the  present 
state  of  the  development  of  medical  science  at  the  very  minimum 
cost,  it  necessarily  follows  that  to  combine  its  activities  with  those 
of  other  departments  leads  inevitably  either  to  an  impairment  of 
its  efficiency  or  an  increase  in  cost  of  maintenance  and  probably 
to  both. 

The  high  standard  of  efficiency  in  the  New  York  State  hospitals 
as  a  result  of  the  administration,  which  we  propose  to  continue, 
has  been  such  that  it  has  been  copied  by  others,  and  it  is  universally 


the  insane  in  this  State  is  lower  than  that  in  other  States  where 
the  standards  are  not  so  high. 

The  history  of  the  Department  shows  that  the  hospitals  for 
the  insane  were  governed  by  local  boards  of  managers  for  thirty 
years,  by  a  single  Commissioner  for  sixteen  years  and  by  a  Com- 
mission as  constituted  at  the  present  time  for  twenty-six  years. 

The  present  method  of  administration  was  adopted  by  the 
Legislature  after  a  careful  investigation  of  the  conditions  prevail- 
ing in  the  State  institutions,  by  a  Senate  coimnittee. 

The 'Charities  (  lommittee  is  therefore  firmly  of  the  opinion  thai 
there  is  not  only  no  indication  of  a  necessity  of  any  change  in  the 
present  method  of  government  of  the  Department,  hut  that  any 
changes  would  ho  highly  unwise  and  would  seriously  threaten  the 
welfare  of  the  insane  warns  of  the  State.  To  inaugurate  a  system 
of  care  in  this  State  which  has  proved  unsatisfactory  in  others 
would  be  highly  disastrous. 

Wo  therefore  urge  upon  the  Convention  the  wisdom  id"  con- 
tinning  a  form  of  government  of  the  hospitals  for  the  insane 
which  has  stood  the  test  of  the  last  twenty-six  years  and  which 
seems  to  meet  with  the  entire  approval  of  the  people  of  the  State. 

J.  YV.  WADSWOimi, 

( lhairman. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  35 


MFNORITY    REPORT    ON    THE    PROPOSED    BUDGET 
SYSTEM  FOR  THE  STATE 


August  5,  1915 
By  Mr.  Wagner: 

I  disagree  with  the  report  of  the  Finance  Committee  in  that  its 
conclusions  and  recommendations  are  in  many  substantial  respects 
inadequate  and  inconsistent. 

More  particularly  I  submit  that  the  report  of  the  majority  de- 
prives the  Legislature  of  the  power  which  finds  expression  in  the 
Federal  Constitution,  the  father  and  mother  of  our  state  constitu- 
tions, to  the  effect  that  all  appropriations  should  originate  in  the 
legislative  branch  of  the  government  elected  by  and  representative 
of  the  people  who  pay  the  taxes.  Though  this  sentiment  may  not 
have  been  written  in  the  letter,  it  has  existed  in  the  spirit  of  our 
State  Constitution.  The  producers  of  public  money  should  retain 
control  of  the  public  purse  strings.  This  was  the  contention  of  the 
Barons  who  wrenched  the  Magna  Charta  from  King  John  and  in 
all  the  intervening  years  this  policy  has  been  the  cornerstone  of  the 
structure  of  legislative  government. 

The  majority  report  admits  that  the  two  prime  requisites  for  a 
State  budget  are  accurate  information  and  complete  publicity ; 
and  yet  the  constitutional  provision  which  it  proposes  secures 
neither.  It  admits  that  the  great  need  of  our  State  finances  is  a 
scientific  budget  and  then  it  proposes  a  budget  without  science. 
A 


Doc.  No.  35  2 

It  recognizes  the  evil  of  the  present  system  of  basing  appropria- 
tions largely  upon  conjecture  and  yet  it  provides  for  a  "  guess  " 
by  the  heads  of  the  departments  followed  by  a  "  guess  "  by  the 
Governor,  with  the  points  of  political  advantage  always  in  sight. 

The  report  complains  that  appropriations  are  now  made  on 
"  requests  "  and  then  continues  the  very  evil  of  which  it  complains 
in  substance  though  it  changes  it  in  form. 

Facts  for  a  scientific  budget  can  and  should  be  secured  by  the 
same  method  through  which  they  are  secured  in  a  court  or  in  any 
other  tribunal  of  public  moment  and  civic  interest.  Such  a  method 
is  embodied  in  the  proposal  introduced  by  Mr.  A.  E.  Smith, 
Pr.  345. 

The  report  holds  that  the  Legislature  is  not  the  proper  branch 
of  government  wherein  appropriations  should  originate.  While 
contending  in  one  place  that  the  Legislature  should  not  surrender 
its  historic  control  of  the  public  purse  strings,  the  report  asserts 
in  another  place  that  the  Legislature  is  not  the  proper  branch  of 
government  to  originate  appropriations.  If  the  Legislature  be 
not  the  proper  place  to  originate  appropriations,  then  it  would 
seem  the  United  States  has  been  traveling  upon  the  wrong  path 
for  130  years  and  still  continues  to  pursue  its  devious  way;  if 
the  Legislature  be  not  the  proper  branch  of  government  to  origi- 
nate appropriations,  for  a  century  or  more  the  Legislature  of  New 
York  has  been  exercising  a  duty  erroneously  given  to  it.  Even 
before  New  York  became  a  State,  the  colonial  governors  sent 
over  here  by  the  King  of  England  voiced  the  sentiments  which 
this  report  now  approves.  But  the  early  colonists  did  not  approve 
it.  All  the  statesmen  who  have  since  helped  make  New  York  the 
Empire  State  of  the  Union  did  not  approve  it. 

The  majority  report  states  that  "  a  real  budget  program  pre- 
sented by  the  Executive  to  the  Legislature  should  receive  and  in 
other  countries  does  receive  criticism  and  suggestions,  even  from 
its  own  party  members".  I  submit  that  the  application  of  the 
word  "  Executive  "  as  applied  to  the  budgets  referred  to  is  not 
warranted  by  the  definition  of  the  word  "executive"  in  any 
standard  dictionary  of  the  English  language,  and  I  further  submit 
that  in  the  principal  countries  referred  to  the  "  budget"  is  really 
a  "  parlimentary  "  and  not  an  "  executive  budget  ". 


3  Doc.  No.  35 

The  prevailing  report  asserts  that  the  present  method  of  ap- 
propriation destroys  publicity  and  opportunity  for  debate.  Yet 
it  is  obvious  that  the  proposed  method  secures  publicity  on  routine 
matters  of  administration,  where  publicity  is  least  needed  and 
gives  no  guaranty  whatever  of  publicity  on  special  appropriations 
where  publicity  is  vital  to  economy.  Neither  does  it  make  ade- 
quate provisions  for  open  and  thorough  debate. 

The  majority  report  complains  further  that  appropriations  are 
rushed  through  in  the  final  hours  of  the  session,  but  it  fails  to  rec- 
ommend a  provision  like  the  one  to  be  found  in  the  Constitutions 
of  Louisiana  and  Mississippi,  making  it  impossible  to  pass  any 
appropriations  during  the  last  five  days  of  the  session. 

It  deprecates  the  lack  of  consideration  given  to  appropriation 
bills  but  it  fails  to  set  a  time  limit  for  the  introduction  of  such 
bills,  nor  does  it  suggest  a  method  of  supplying  exact  and  scientific 
information  to  the  members  of  the  Legislature. 

It  states  that  the  historic  function  of  the  Legislature  is  to  hold 
the  purse-strings  of  the  State  and  it  then  proceeds  to  hand  this 
historic  function  over  to  the  Governor  and  make  the  Legislature 
a  mere  rubber-stamp  on  budget  appropriations. 

It  condemns  the  present  power  of  the  Governor  to  punish  op- 
ponents and  to  reward  friends  in  the  matter  of  appropriations, 
but  it  does  not  recommend  a  corrective  for  this  abuse  except  in 
case  of  appropriations  for  mere  matters  of  administration,  thereby 
lodging  in  the  Executive  enormous  possibilities  thus  to  abuse  his 
office. 

It  postulates  the  necessity  of  a  "  greater  sense  of  responsibil- 
ity "  in  appropriations,  and  then  it  discards  the  only  method  that 
can  secure  complete,  open,  definite  and  undeniable  responsibility 
through  compelling  the  heads  of  departments  to  swear  to  their 
estimates. 

If  this  report  is  to  be  made  the  policy  of  the  State,  I  suggest 
that  it  be  carried  to  its  logical  conclusion.  If  publicity  is  desir- 
able on  mere  matters  of  administration,  it  appears  to  me  that  it  is 
especially  desirable  on  special  appropriation  bills.  If  the  Gover- 
nor is  to  be  prevented  from  making  a  political  foot-ball  of  mere 
routine  appropriations,  he  should  be  prevented  from  making  a 
political  foot-ball  of  special  appropriation  bills. 


Doc.  No.  35  4 

If  I  am  correct  in  the  opinions  and  conclusions  heretofore  ex- 
pressed, it  becomes  manifest  that  the  remedy  proposed  in  the  ma- 
jority report  is  at  best  only  partial  and  ineffective  to  consummate 
the  desired  financial  reforms.  I  therefore  respectfully  submit  to 
the  Convention  the  following  recommendations : 

It  is  recommended  that  the  legislature  retain  the  power  which 
it  has  always  exercised  of  originating  appropriations ;  on  the 
theory  that  the  source  from  which  the  money  comes  should  retain 
control  of  the  money  and  dictate  the  manner  of  its  expenditure 
within  the  proper  constitutional  limitations. 

Without  receding  from  the  recommendation  last  expressed,  it 
would  seem  that  the  method  proposed  in  the  majority  report,  being 
imperfect  as  it  now  stands,  should  be  perfected  by  the  following 
amendment:  It  should  be  required  that  the  head  of  each  depart- 
ment swear  to  his  estimates  and  classify  them  in  a  division  of 
necessities,  desirabilities  or  contingencies,  as  the  case  may  be,  ac- 
cording to  the  suggestion  made  by  Governor  Glynn  at  a  hearing 
before  the  Committee  on  State  Finances.  Such  sworn  estimates 
should  be  submitted  to  the  Governor,  the  Comptroller  and  every 
member  elected  to  the  Legislature  at  least  fifteen  days  before  the 
Legislature  convenes.  This  procedure  is  now  in  force  in  several 
States  with  good  effect.  Members  of  the  Legislature  intending  to 
introduce  special  bills  asking  for  appropriations  should  be  re- 
quired to  file  with  the  Governor,  the  Comptroller  and  the  members 
of  the  Legislature  within  fifteen  days  previous  to  the  convening  of 
the  Legislature  a  copy  of  the  bill,  stating  the  amount  of  money 
desired  and  the  purpose  for  which  it  is  to  be  expended.  Fifteen 
days  after  the  Legislature  meets,  it  should  be  the  duty  of  the  Gov- 
ernor to  submit  a  budget  on  these  special  bills  with  a  message  ex- 
pressing his  views  thereon,  just  as  the  procedure  proposed  in  the 
majority  report  provides  in  reference  to  matters  of  administra- 
tion. 

This  treatment  of  special  appropriation  bills  would  certainly 
abolish  the  evil  of  which  the  report  of  the  majority  complains  of 
permitting  the  Governor  to  reward  friends  or  punish  enemies  by 
preference  in  the  case  of  special  appropriation  bills. 

In  addition  to  a  provision  preventing  the  passage  of  any  ap- 
propriation bill  in  the  closing  days  of  the  Legislature,  there  should 


5  Doc.  No.  35 

be  a  provision  forbidding  the  introduction  after  the  Legislature 
has  convened  of  appropriation  bills  of  any  kind  except  by  a  re- 
port of  a  financial  committee  of  either  House  of  the  Legislature. 

It  is  further  recommended  that  special  appropriation  bills  be 
not  passed  without  a  two-thirds  vote  of  all  the  members  elected. 

It  is  further  recommended  that  all  items  in  appropriation  bills 
be  voted  upon  separately.  This  would  insure  the  responsibility 
of  action  and  the  maturity  of  deliberation  which  the  majority  re- 
port emphasizes. 

It  is  further  recommended  that  a  provision  compelling  the  ab- 
solute itemization  of  every  appropriation  exceeding  the  sum  of 
$10,000  be  adopted. 

Respectfully  submitted, 

ROBERT  WAGNER. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  36 


REPORT  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON    CITIES,   RELATIVE 
TO  THE  SEVERAL  PROPOSED   AMENDMENTS 


August  5,  1915 
Mr.  Low,  from  the  Committee  on  Cities,  to  which  were  referred 
the  several  Proposed  Constitutional  Amendments  relating  to  Homb 
Rule  for  cities,  as  follows: 

No.  719,  introduced  by  Mr.  Wagner. 
No.  187,  introduced  by  Mr.  Sanders. 
No.  774,  introduced  by  Mr.  R.  B.  Smith. 
No.  283,  introduced  by  Mr.  O'Brian. 
No.  535,  introduced  by  Mr.  Low. 
No.  335,  introduced  by  Mr.  Franchot. 
No.  381,  introduced  by  Mr.  Mann. 
No.  721,  introduced  by  Mr.  E.  N.  Smith. 
No.  568,  introduced  by  Mr.  Eisner. 
No.  629,  introduced  by  Mr.  Weed. 
No.  698,  introduced  by  Mr.  Cobb. 
No.  671,  introduced  by  Mr.  Green. 
No.  678,  introduced  by  Mr.  Franchot. 
No.  693,  introduced  by  Mr.  Berri. 

No.  709,  introduced  by  Mr.  Fobes,  reports  that  the  Committee 
held  a  number  of  hearings  on  them  and  on  the  subject  matter  em- 
braced in  such  Proposed  Constitutional  Amendments.     It  has  also 


Doc.  No.  36  2 

been  made  a  careful  study  of  Article  XII  of  the  present  Constitu- 
tion, which  article  relates  to  the  government  of  cities.  The  Com- 
mittee reports  by  proposed  amendment,  entitled :  "  Proposed 
Constitutional  Amendment  to  amend  Article  XII  of  the  Constitu- 
tion generally,  in  relation  to  cities  and  villages  and  their  powers 
of  self  government,"  (Int.  No.  712),  which  was  read  twice,  and 
said  Committee  reports  in  favor  of  the  passage  of  the  same  which 
report  was  agreed  to,  and  said  proposed  amendment  ordered 
printed  and  referred  to  the  Committee  of  the  Whole. 


Mr.  Franchot  presented  the  following: 

MINORITY  REPORT 

To  the  Constitutional  Convention: 

The  undersigned  disagree  with  the  report  of  the  majority  for 
the  reasons  hereafter  given. 

It  is  obvious  that  the  proposal  of  the  Committee  is  a  result 
of  compromise.  Any  criticism  contained  in  this  minority  report 
is  a  criticism  of  that  result,  not  of  the  efforts  of  the  individual 
members  of  the  majority.  We  are  forced  to  disagree  only  be- 
cause the  composite  result  seems  to  us  to  violate  the  fundamental 
principles  that  must  govern  any  measure  designed  to  meet  the 
widespread  demand  from  the  cities  of  the  State,  and  especially 
from  the  city  of  New  York,  for  increased  power  of  self-govern- 
ment. This  demand  is  based  upon  two  principal  causes  of  com- 
plaint: (1)  interference  with  local  affairs  by  the  Legislature; 
(2)  inadequate  power  over  matters  of  city  concern,  even  the  most 
minute. 

The  relief  demanded  has  been  grouped  concisely  under  two 
heads:  First,  power;  second,  protection.  A  proper  proposal  for 
Home  Rule  should  in  our  judgment  contain  the  following  essen- 
tials, for  which  we  have  consistently  contended: 

First.— A  BROAD  GRANT  TO  CITIES  OF  POWEK,  EX- 
CLUSIVE IN  SUBSTANCE  AS  WELL  AS  IN  FORM,  TO' 
REGULATE  ITS  LOCAL  AFFAIRS,  COUPLED  WITH  A 
PROHIBITION  AGAINST  SPECIAL  LEGISLATION  BY 
THE  STATE  WITH  RESPECT  THERETO. 


3  Doc.  No.  36 

Such  grant  is  required  to  cure  the  following  evils  of  the  present 
system  of  city  government : 

(a)  The  burdening  of  the  Legislature  with  local  matters  in 
which  the  State  is  not  primarily  concerned. 

(b)  The  avoidance  by  local  officers  of  responsibility  for  city 
government, —  colloquially  termed  "  passing  the  buck  ". 

(c)  The  delay  and  consequent  inefficiency  in  performing  neces- 
sary city  functions. 

(d)  The  settlement  of  city  problems  away  from  home  by  legis- 
lators not  responsible  to  the  locality  for  such  settlement  and  un- 
familiar with  such  problems. 

Such  grant  in  order  to  cure  these  evils  must  obviously  include 
the  power  of  revision  and  amendment  of  charters  and  special  city 
laws.  Power  without  the  machinery  of  government  to  exercise  it 
is  nil. 

Second.—  THE  PRESERVATION  OF  STATE  SOVER- 
EIGNTY OVER  CITIES  THROUGH  LEGISLATIVE  CON- 
TROL EXERCISED  BY  GENERAL  LAWS. 

Home  Rule  for  cities  does  not  imply  a  divesting  of  State  con- 
trol over  cities.  We  agree  that  the  paramount  authority  of  the 
State  should  be  retained ;  we  disagree  only  as  to  the  method  of  its 
exercise.  As  to  the  matters  not  within  the  grant  of  power  to  cities, 
the  Legislature  should,  of  course,  have  plenary  power  as  now. 
As  to  matters  within  the  grant  it  should  retain  power  to  enact 
general  laws.  The  retention  of  the  right  in  the  Legislature  to 
nullify  local  action  in  purely  local  affairs  is  not  necessary  to  ade- 
quate State  control.  We  submit  that  the  cities  of  the  State  have 
justified  by  experience  their  ability  to  administer  their  local  af- 
fairs free  from  legislative  check  or  authority.  "We  do  not  sym- 
pathize with  putting  their  citizens  in  a  class  with  the  inhabitants 
of  the  Philippine  Islands.  As  citizens  of  the  city  they  have  the 
same  capacity  for  self-government  as  they  possess  as  citizens  of 
the  State. 

Third.—  THE  EXPRESSION  OF  THE  GRANT  OF 
POWER  IN  SIMPLE.  DIRECT  AND  SPECIFIC  LAN- 
GUAGE SO  AS  TO  AVOID  CONFUSION  AND  ENDLESS 


Doc.  No.  36  4 

LITIGATION     IN     DEFINING     STATE     AND     CITY 
POWERS,  AND  THE  MANNER  OF  THEIR  EXERCISE. 

Governmental  power  to  be  effective  nrast  be  free  from  doubt. 
Constitutional  amendments  in  most  of  the  other  states  have  made 
a  grant  of  power  to  cities  in  general  terms  similar  to  those  em- 
ployed by  the  majority  proposal,  such  as  "  local  self-government  ", 
the  right  to  regulate  "  local  affairs "  or  "  municipal  affairs ". 
Judicial  construction  has  everywhere  been  necessary  to  define 
the  grant.  A  mass  of  conflicting  decisions  on  important  phases  of 
city  government  in  different  states  reveals  that,  by  such  general 
grant  to  cities,  governmental  powers  are  divided  into  three  classes : 

(a)  Those  clearly  granted  to  cities; 

(b)  Those  clearly  reserved  to  the  State ;  and 

(c)  Those  which  are  neither  clearly  granted  nor  reserved. 

We  favor  a  specific  assignment  of  this  last  class  of  powers  either 
to  the  city  or  to  the  State.  This  assignment  should  be  by  the  Con- 
vention as  a  matter  of  governmental  policy  and  not  left  to  the 
uncertainty  and  delay  of  piecemeal  judicial  construction.  We 
are  confident  that,  profiting  by  the  experience  of  other  states,  a 
proposal  can  be  drafted  which  performs  this  task. 

Fourth,— THE  RIGHT  TO  EACH  CITY  AT  ITS 
OPTION  TO  CONTINUE  AS  A  LEGISLATIVE  CHARTER 
CITY  OR  BECOME  A  HOME  RULE  CITY. 

Home  Rule  should  not  be  forced  upon  any  community.  There 
may  be  a  sentiment  in  some  cities  against  a  change  in  the  present 
system  of  city  government.  On  the  other  hand  other  cities  have 
expressed  a  desire  for  a  change.  Both  can  be  satisfied.  To  sub- 
ject the  desire  of  either  class  to  that  of  the  other  would  be  hostile 
to  the  very  principle  for  which  we  contend.  The  grant,  therefore, 
should  be  optional. 

Considered  in  the  light  of  these  fundamental  principles  the 
proposal  of  the  majority  fails  in  the  following  particulars: 

First. —  No  grant  of  exclusive  power  to  cities  is  made  except 
possibly  as  to  a  few  minor  matters  which  might  be  so  held  by  the 
courts.      The  extent  to  which   the  control   over  officers  and   em- 


5  Doc.  No.  36 

ployees  as  defined  in  subdivision  "  a  "  of  section  3  can  be  exer- 
cised by  municipal  action  without  "  changing  the  framework  "  of 
the  city  government  is  left  in  doubt.  If  the  courts  hold  (as  we 
think  they  would)  that  a  redistribution  of  powers  and  duties 
among  officers  or  departments,  or  an  increase  or  decrease  in  their 
number  is  a  "  change  of  framework  of  government,"  there  would 
remain  nothing  exclusively  in  the  control  of  the  municipality  ex- 
cept the  qualifications,  mode  of  selection,  terms  of  office,  com- 
pensation and  method  of  removal  of  officers  and  employees.  If 
this  is  the  extent  to  which  Home  Rule  is  to  be  granted,  the  Con- 
stitution should  so  state  simply  and  directly. 

Furthermore,  the  Committee  has  recognized  to  such  an  extent 
the  necessity  of  hedging  about  with  restrictions  the  exercise  of  the 
power  of  amendment  by  local  authorities  as  to  make  it  very  difficult 
to  adopt  any  change  at  all.  Amendments  to  the  charter  are  sub- 
ject to  the  veto  of  one  official,  the  Mayor  of  the  city,  and  no  pro- 
vision is  made  for  overriding  his  disapproval  of  a  charter  change. 
Thus,  conflicting  interests  of  different  bodies  or  officials  on  whom 
the  power  is  jointly  conferred  will  tend  to  defeat  its  exercise.  This 
further  demonstrates  the  impracticability  of  providing  for  the 
adoption  of  separate  amendments  by  the  local  authorities  of  a 
city. 

Passing  to  general  charter  revision  we  find  that  it  would  take 
approximately  three  years  between  the  first  proposal  for  a  charter 
revision  and  its  final  enactment  into  law.  After  the  draft  is 
prepared  by  the  charter  commission,  it  is  to  be  approved  by  the 
people.  If  approved  by  the  people,  it  is  submitted  to  the  Legis- 
lature. If  not  disapproved  by  the  Legislature  within  sixty  days 
it  takes  effect  as  law.  The  Legislature  may  thus  destroy  the  en- 
tire work  in  charter  reform  by  its  disapproval.  The  approval 
of  electors  of  a  city  should  in  our  judgment  be  final.  It  would  be 
possible  to  provide  that,  if  the  charter  was  defective  or  not  in  ac- 
cordance with  State  policy,  it  be  returned  to  the  Commission  for 
further  revision.  We  submit  that  this  phase  of  the  plan  is  waste- 
ful and  impracticable.  Under  the  proposal  it  would  be  possible, 
however,  without  the  necessity  of  a  Revision  Commission,  for  the 


Doc.  No.  36  6 

charter  to  be  completely  amended  by  concurrent  action  of  the 
Mayor,  the  local  legislative  body,  and  the  Board  of  Estimate,  if 
any,  and  the  failure  of  the  Legislature  to  nullify. 

After  the  Constitution  takes  effect  on  January  1st,  1916,  no 
amendment  to  the  framework  of  any  city  charter  could  be  made 
until  March  1st,  1917,  and  not  even  a  very  necessary  change  in  a 
city  charter  could  be  made  after  the  first  week  of  any  session  until 
the  following  legislative  year.  New  York  city  during  the  last 
session  was  compelled  to  apply  immediately  before  adjournment 
for  special  and  urgent  relief  in  connection  with  the  building  of  its 
subways.  The  existence  of  the  Majority's  proposal  would  prevent 
such  emergency  action.  It  is  apparent  that  the  nullification 
scheme  fails  to  obviate  any  of  the  existing  evils.  The  Legislature 
will  continue  to  be  burdened  with  local  matters,  local  officers  will 
continue  to  side-step  responsibility,  delay  and  consequent  ineffi- 
ciency will  continue,  and  any  change  involving  matters  of  impor- 
tance will  still  be  finally  settled  away  from  home. 

Second:  The  language  of  the  grant  will  breed  hopeless  doubt, 
uncertainty  and  confusion  and  throw  into  the  courts  the  determina- 
tion of  the  exercise  of  the  respective  powers  of  city  and  State 
in  this  respect: 

(a)  It  fails  to  define  the  line  between  powers  granted  to  a  city 
and  those  reserved  to  the  State.  As  to  such  matters  as  taxation, 
the  issuance  of  bonds,  the  regulation  of  the  operation  of  privately 
owned  public  utilities,  the  acquirement  of  public  utilities  by  the 
city  or  the  exercise  of  the  power  of  eminent  domain,  acts  of  a 
given  administrative  officer  will  depend  for  their  validity  upon 
the  validity  of  the  grant  of  authority  to  him  to  act.  If  granted 
by  the  Legislature,  claim  could  be  made  that  they  should  have  been 
granted  by  the  city ;  if  granted  by  the  city,  vice  versa. 

(b)  It  has  injected  a  further  element  of  doubt  and  confusion 
by  providing  two  methods  by  which  municipal  action  may  be 
taken  as  to  matters  determined  to  be  within  the  grant  of  power 
to  cities  to  regulate  its  "  property,  business  and  local  affairs." 
If  such  action  involves  a  change  in  "  framework  of  its  govern- 
ment "  it  must  be  submitted  to  the  Legislature  for  possible  nulli- 
fication.     The  classification   made   is   illogical   and   unscientific. 


7  Doc.  No.  36 

For  example,  matters  of  important  State  concern,  such  as  the 
recall  of  public  officers,  are  left  for  determination  by  the  local 
authorities  in  the  use  of  the  words  "  method  of  removal,"  while 
matters  of  no  importance  to  the  State  must  be  submitted  to  the 
Legislature.  Two  questions,  therefore,  may  always  be  raised  as 
to  any  act  of  an  official  authorized  by  an  amendment  of  the 
charter  made  by  the  local  authorities :  (1)  Is  the  power  to  fix  such" 
provisions  included  in  the  grant  to  the  city?  and  (2)  can  such 
power  be  validly  exercised  by  the  local  legislative  authorities 
without  submission  to  the  State  Legislature? 

(c)  Finally,  it  has  injected  an  even  more  serious  element  of 
doubt  by  providing  that  the  Legislature  may  pass  special  city  laws 
relating  to  the  "  government  "  of  municipalities.  Just  how  laws 
relating  to  "  government "  differ  from  laws  relating  to  "  property, 
business  and  local  affairs  "  of  cities  no  one  can  say.  Certainly 
the  present  abuse  in  the  introduction  and  passage  of  special  laws 
affecting  cities  will  continue,  and  the  courts  in  order  to  sustain 
the  constitutionality  of  such  legislative  acts  will  be  forced  narrowly 
to  limit  the  group  of  subjects  included  within  the  words  "  prop- 
erty, business  and  local  affairs  ".  The  ordinary  meaning  of  the 
word  "  government "  comprehends  the  officers  to  administer  it 
and  "  framework  "  to  support  it,  and  thus  its  use  hopelessly  mud- 
dles the  meaning  of  this  "  exclusive  "  grant  of  power  and  the 
manner  in  which  it  is  to  be  exercised. 

If  you  subtract  from  the  acts  relating  to  the  "  property,  busi- 
ness and  local  affairs  "  of  the  city  the  acts  relating  to  its  "  gov- 
ernment ",  the  result  is  zero.  This  seems  to  us  the  exact  measure 
of  exclusive  control  granted  to  cities  by  the  proposed  amendment. 
It  is  only  fair  to  state  that  this  provision  of  the  proposal  was 
inserted  for  the  purpose  of  preserving  the  present  suspensive  veto 
provisions  of  the  Constitution  as  to  special  laws  affecting  matters  or 
State  concern.  It  is  our  opinion  that  it  accomplishes  this  purpose 
only  at  the  cost  of  practically  destroying  the  exclusive  nature  of  the 
grant.  Since  the  vast  majority  of  governmental  acts  must  affect 
the  rights  of  property  and  of  personal  liberty,  and  involve  finan- 
cial responsibility  on  the  part  of  the  city,  we  may  be  sure  that 
such  questions  as  above  indicated  will  endlessly  be  raised. 


Doc.  No.  36  8 

In  sum,  the  proposal  begins  with  a  promise  of  complete  Home 
Rule  to  cities,  but  one  reaches  the  end  only  to  discover  that  it  is  but 
a  declaration  of  principle  and  that  the  limitations  subsequently  im- 
posed effectively  destroy  the  first  impression  and  promise-  If 
adopted  it  will  tend  to  throw  into  confusion  for  the  next  ten  years 
the  exercise  of  power  by  city  government  throughout  the  State. 
Such  a  measure  does  not  confer  genuine  Home  Eule,  does  not  elimi- 
nate mandatory  legislation  affecting  cities,  narrows  instead  of 
widens  the  present  sphere  of  local  control  by  municipalities. 
Respectfully  submitted, 

JAMES  A.  FOLEY 
EDWARD  E.  FRANCHOT. 

Capitol,  Albany,  N.  Y.,  August  5,  1915. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN   CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  37 


ADDRESSES  OF  WILLIAM  D.  GUTHRIE,  D.  CADY  HER. 
RICK  AND  GEORGE  W.  WICKERSHAM,  BEFORE  THE 
COMMITTEE  ON  SUFFRAGE,  JUNE  16,  1915 


REMARKS  OF  WILLIAM  D.  GUTHRIE,  OF  NEW  YORK 

Mr.  Chairman  and  Gentlemen  of  the  Committee  on  Suffrage: 

I  desire  to  be  heard  in  support  of  so  much  of  the  proposed 
constitutional  amendment  introduced  by  Delegate  John  G.  Saxe 
and  now  before  you  for  consideration  as  provides  for  nominations 
by  party  conventions  for  elective  State  offices  and  for  elective 
judicial  offices,  state  or  local.  I  do  not,  however,  support  the 
state-wide  personal  registration  which  he  proposes,  because  I 
believe  that  this  would  be  a  mistake,  as  well  as  an  unnecessary 
inconvenience  to  voters  residing  in  the  rural  districts.  The  con- 
ditions in  these  districts  are  very  different  from  those  obtaining 
in  the  cities  of  the  State,  with  their  large  and  congested  popu- 
lations. In  the  country  districts,  the  inspectors,  watchers,  chal- 
lengers and  public  are  generally  acquainted  with  all  the  voters, 
and  fraud  is  much  more  readily  discovered  or  prevented  than 

*  In  accordance  with  the  suggestion  of  the  Chairman  of  the  Committee,  the 
language  has  been  revised  and  amplified. 


Doc.  No.   37  2 

in  the  great  cities.  I  am  myself  a  voter  in  a  rural  district  of 
Nassau  County,  and  I  am  certain  that  annual  personal  regis- 
tration would  be  an  unnecessary  inconvenience,  if  not  a  hardship, 
to  a  large  number  of  the  voters  there,  and  would  tend  to  prevent 
many  from  voting  who  are  ready  and  willing  to  do  so  on  election 
day.  It  seems  arbitrary  and  senseless  to  require  voters  in  the 
rural  districts,  busy  about  other  things  than  politics  and  living 
at  a  distance  from  the  place  of  registry,  annually  to  register  in 
person,  when  they  have  lived  all  their  lives  or  for  many  years 
in  the  same  district,  are  well  known  to  nearly  every  resident, 
and  fraud  is  practically  impossible 

ihe  great  cities  present  very  different  conditions.  There  many 
uo  not  even  know  the  names  of  their  next  door  neighbors.  The 
inhabitants  of  every  block  change  each  year.  Frequently  a  single 
building  will  be  the  residence  of  more  voters  than  can  be  found 
in  one  or  more  square  miles  in  the  rural  districts.  The  City  of 
G  reater  N  ew  1  ork  now  has  a  population  of  approximately  5,- 
500,000  crowded  into  one  corner  of  the  State.  This  is  more  than 
one-half  of  the  total  State  population.  It  is  practically  impossi- 
ble to  keep  track  of  the  constantly  changing  population  in  such 
an  urban  district.  Experience  for  many  years  has  demonstrated 
the  necessity  for  annual  registration  in  New  York,  as  well  as  in 
the  other  large  cities  of  the  State.  Many,  however,  believe  that 
urban  registration  could  safely  be  made  less  irksome  and  in- 
convenient to  those  who  permanently  reside  in  a  district.  If 
they  actually  voted  there  at  the  previous  election,  they  should  not 
be  required  to  appear  personally  for  registration  but  might  be 
permitted  to  register  by  sending  a  verified  notice  of  continuance 
of  residence.  Some  such  provision,  if  adopted,  would  avoid  what 
is  a  needless  inconvenience  in  the  case  of  a  large  part  of  the 
electorate  and  would  materially  increase  the  urban  vote. 

The  privilege  of  nominating  elective  State  officers  by  means 
of  delegate  conventions  is  now  denied  by  the  Election  Law;  but 
it  ought,  in  my  opinion,  to  be  recognized  as  essentially  a  consti- 
tutional right,  which  the  legislature  should  not  be  at  liberty  to 
abridge.  The  right  to  assemble  peaceably  for  the  purpose  of 
nominating  candidates  is  certainly  a  political  right  of  permanent 
importance  and  vital  concern  to  all  citizens,  and  it  should  be 
guaranteed  by  constitutional  provision  and  not  be  left  to  constant 


3  Doc.   Xo.   37 

change  or  denial  by  the  legislature.  The  present  State  constitu- 
tion regulates  the  qualifications  of  voters,  the  registration  of 
citizens  entitled  to  vote,  and  the  creation  of  registration  and 
election  boards.  It  does  not  contain  a  single  provision  in  regard 
to  nomination  for  office,  even  for  the  office  of  Governor,  although 
nomination  for  State  offices  is  of  far  greater  importance  to  the 
body  politic  than  many  of  the  matters  now  regulated  by  constitu- 
tional provision  or  recited  in  the  Bill  of  Rights. 

The  constantly  increasing  functions  of  the  modern  State  have 
made  the  executive  and  administrative  department  the  most  im- 
portant and  powerful  branch  of  government,  and  the  increasing 
complexity  of  governmental  machinery  has  rendered  it  absolutely 
essential  that  competent,  expert  and  trained  public  officials 
should  be  chosen.  Government  has  become  an  extremely  difficult 
and  scientific  business,  and  special  capacity,  training  and  expert 
knowledge  are  more  and  more  required  in  executive  and  adminis- 
trative office.  The  test  of  a  good  government  is  more  than  ever 
its  aptitude  to  produce  good  administration.  If  we  are  to  have 
efficient  and  avoid  wasteful  administration,  the  greatest  care  must 
be  exercised  in  selecting  candidates.  The  fullest  opportunity 
for  information,  investigation  and  discussion  in  regard  to  the 
qualifications  and  character  of  proposed  candidates  is  indispen- 
sable. As  Governor  Throop  said  nearly  a  century  ago,  "  There 
is  perhaps  no  part  of  the  duties  of  citizenship  which  requires 
more  sound  judgment  and  honesty  and  singleness  of  purpose 
than  those  relating  to  the  nomination  and  election  of  executive 
and  administrative  officers."  Good  government  depends  in  large 
measure  much  more  on  the  ability  and  character  of  the  men  who 
administer  it  than  upon  laws  or  institutions.  The  maxim,  con- 
stantly on  the  lips  of  so  many,  that  a  government  of  laws  and  not 
of  men  is  the  controlling  desideratum  may  be  grossly  mislead- 
ing, for  the  best  system  of  laws  in  the  hands  of  incompetent,  in- 
efficient and  dishonest  administrators  will  produce  far  worse 
results  than  an  inferior  system  in  the  hands  of  competent,  effi- 
cient and  honest  public  officials.  It  may  be  truthfully  said  that 
the  most  difficult  task  and  the  highest  duty  that  our  electorate 
are  ever  called  upon  to  perform  is  the  selection  of  candidates 
for  elective  State  office.     In  order  to  perform  that  duty,  there 


Doc.  No.  37  4 

must  be  adequate  and  reliable  means  of  information,  full  op- 
portunity for  conference,  exchange  of  views,  debate  and  criti- 
cism as  to  the  capacity  and  character  of  candidates,  and  effect- 
ive co-operation  and  organization  in  support  of  qualified  candi- 
dates. 

The  selection  of  a  Governor  for  the  great  State  of  New  York, 
containing  more  than  10,250,000  inhabitants  and  comprising  a 
political  constituency  larger  than  any  other  in  this  country  or 
Europe,  is  surely  a  matter  of  vital  and  profound  concern  to  the 
whole  body  politic,  to  every  citizen,  to  every  community,  to 
every  party,  to  every  class,  to  every  interest.  If  the  short  ballot 
be  now  adopted,  the  successful  administration  of  the  whole  State 
government  will  be  practically  staked  upon  the  selection  of  quali- 
fied candidates  for  Governor.  All  hope  of  governmental  reform, 
efficiency  and  economy  will  then  necessarily  depend  upon  the 
statesmanship  and  character  of  one  man,  who  will  be  vested  with 
full  executive  and  administrative  powers  over  a  population  and 
a  territory  larger  than  some  of  the  nations  of  the  world.  A 
wise  and  safe  choice  will  be  infinitely  more  essential  and  more 
difficult  than  in  the  past.  Indeed,  if  the  views  of  certain  ad- 
vocates of  the  short  ballot  prevail,  we  are  to  vest  all  this  power 
in  the  Governor  without  any  restraint  except  his  sense  of  re- 
sponsibility to  the  people  and  without  an  effective  check  upon 
his  will  or  caprice  until  the  expiration  of  a  term  of  four  years! 
We  should  then  have  to  trust  him  absolutely.  We  should  in 
truth  have  precisely  the  definition  of  an  elective  despotism  and 
tyranny  —  beneficent  if  we  are  so  fortunate  and  blessed  as  to 
secure  an  exceptionally  able  and  high-minded  statesman  for 
Governor,  baneful  if  we  have  an  incompetent,  untrained,  or 
scheming  politician  or  demagogue.  The  Governor  would  have  it 
immediately  within  his  power  to  become  an  absolute  State  boss 
through  the  use  of  an  enormous  and  constantly  increasing  patron- 
age, directly  or  indirectly  reaching  and  touching  every  election 
district  in  State.  He  would  be  able  to  break  party  lines 
asunder  —  to  promote  the  interest  of  any  group  or  faction — to 
punish  any  adversaries  —  to  cater  to  any  class  and  sacrifice  the 
rights  of  minorities  —  to  substitute  his  will  or  caprice  for  the 
policy  of  his  party  —  to  permit  waste  and  extravagance  —  to 
dictate  who  should  be  his  successor.     A  competent  candidate  for 


5  Doc.  No.  37 

Governor  who  would  be  so  well  known  and  tested  as  to  be  safely 
relied  on  to  resist  this  temptation  would  indeed  be  a  rare  phenom- 
enon. If  history  teaches  us  that  there  is  anything  certain  in 
human  nature,  if  experience,  which  is  of  far  more  value  than 
any  mere  reasoning,  has  again  and  again  demonstrated  any  practi- 
cal and  eternal  truth  in  politics,  it  is  that  unrestrained  power 
inevitably  leads  sooner  or  later  to  abuse  and  tyranny,  and  that 
no  one  official,  be  he  emperor,  king,  president,  or  governor,  can 
safely  be  entrusted  with  any  such  power. 

We  should  bear  in  mind  that  the  extreme  advocates  of  the  short- 
ballot  would  make  the  Governor  supreme  and  independent  of  the 
legislature,  even  more  independent  and  powerful  than  the  Presi- 
dent is  under  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  by  eliminat- 
ing all  requirement  for  the  approval  and  consent  of  the  Senate  in 
regard  to  the  appointment  of  heads  of  the  great  State  depart- 
ments. I  sincerely  hope  that  the  Convention  will  not  make  this 
grave  mistake.  The  number  of  State  elective  officers  should  not 
be  reduced  to  less  than  four,  namely,  Governor,  Lieutenant-Gover- 
nor, Comptroller  and  Attorney-General.  The  Comptroller  should 
be  made  an  auditing  officer  charged  with  supervision  as  such 
over  the  various  departments  of  the  State  and  independent  of 
the  appointing  power.  The  Attorney-General  should  be  made 
the  head  of  a  Department  of  Justice  and  the  responsible  legal 
adviser  of  the  Governor  and  of  every  State  official.  And  the 
heads  of  all  the  great  departments  should  be  appointed  by  the 
Governor  with  the  approval  and  consent  of  the  Senate.  Xo 
Governor  should  be  given  the  unrestrained  power  to  appoint  or 
remove  the  heads  of  all  departments.  The  requirement  of  the 
consent  of  the  Senate  is  a  necessary  and  salutary  restraint  upon 
all  Governors,  good  and  bad.  It  is  better  and  safer  that  Gover- 
nors should  be  compelled  to  submit  to  some  obstacles  than  that 
absolute  power  should  be  vested  in  even  the  best  and  ablest  and 
purest  of  men.  The  principle  of  a  short  ballot  is  the  decrease 
of  elective  offices,  but  not  necessarily  the  placing  of  absolute  and 
unrestrained  power  in  the  hands  of  one  man. 

It  is  quite  true  that  a  State  Constitution  should  deal  only  with 
permanent  and  fundamental  provisions  and  not  attempt  to  regu- 
late matters  of  detail  which  can  be  adequately  dealt  with  by 
ordinary  legislation  and  which  are  in  their  nature  such  as  ought 


Doc.  No.  37  6 

to  be  readily  changeable.  I  am  in  full  accord  in  this,  as  in 
other  respects,  with  the  platform  which  the  Republican  Party 
adopted  in  1914  and  on  which  the  Republican  delegates  to  the 
Constitutional  Convention  were  elected.  Subordinate  and  non- 
essential matters  of  mere  regulation  and  detail  ought  not  to  be 
embodied  in  constitutions.  But  I  venture  to  assert  that  in 
reason  and  sound  policy  there  can  be  no  more  important,  per- 
manent or  fundamental  constitutional  provision  than  one  relating 
to  the  manner  of  selecting  the  highest  State  officers  in  whom  all 
the  executive  and  administrative  powers  of  our  State  govern- 
ment are  to  be  vested.  This  is  a  subject  eminently  fit  and  proper 
for  a  constitution  to  deal  with.  If  this  convention  cannot  solve 
the  problem  of  establishing  a  sound  system  of  nomination  for 
elective  State  offices,  at  least  in  outline  and  cardinal  features,  no 
legislature  can  be  expected  to  do  so.  In  any  event,  the  new 
Constitution  should  declare  emphatically  that  the  right  peace- 
ably to  assemble  in  a  political  convention  composed  of  duly 
elected  delegates  or  representatives  for  the  purpose  of  nominat- 
ing candidates  for  public  office,  State  or  local,  should  not  be 
abridged,  as  in  effect  it  is  abridged  by  the  present  Election  Law. 
I  further  venture  to  assert  that  the  question  of  nominating  candi- 
dates by  delegate  conventions  involves  in  its  essence  the  perpetu- 
ation of  the  fundamental  principle  of  representative  government 
and  of  the  republican  form  of  government  which  the  Founders 
intended  to  establish  and  to  guarantee  to  each  State  of  the  Union. 
The  one  great  contribution  which  the  English-speaking  race  lias 
made  to  the  science  of  politics  has  been  the  representative  princi- 
ple. It  has  been  truly  declared  that  every  lasting  advancement 
made  in  politics  during  the  past  two  centuries,  every  lasting  lib- 
erty secured  for  the  individual,  and  every  lasting  reform  towards 
stability  in  government  and  permanent  effectiveness  in  adminis- 
tration have  been  by  and  through  the  representative  system.  The 
subordination  of  public  officials  to  the  law  and  their  liability 
under  the  law  for  every  illegal  act  sprung  from  the  representative 
principle.  The  independence  of  the  judiciary,  that  great  bul- 
wark of  liberty  and  of  the  rights  of  the  individual,  lias  followed 
upon  the  growth  and  success  of  the  representative  principle.  The 
vivifying  spirit  and  essence  of  that  great  principle  arc  the  deter- 


7  Doc.  No.  37 

mination  of  all  questions  of  practical  government  by  delegates 
or  representatives  chosen  by  the  people,  who  it  is  assumed  can  act 
more  intelligently  than  a  multitude  of  voters  dispersed  over  an 
extensive  territory  and  who  can  best  discern  the  true  interests  of 
their  country.  Government  under  the  representative  principle 
includes  not  merely  legislation  by  the  chosen  representatives  of  the 
people  but  the  practical  conduct  of  the  executive  and  administra- 
tive branches  by  officials  selected  by  the  representatives  of  the 
people.  Despite  all  attacks  upon  our  political  institutions  and 
mistakes  and  maladministration,  the  sound  common  sense  of 
thoughtful  citizens  still  confirms  the  judgment  of  the  Founders 
that  the  only  safe  path  to  better  government  was  to  follow  the 
representative  principle.  This  is  as  true  today  as  it  was  when  the 
Federalist  was  written.  The  direct  nomination  of  executive  or 
judicial  officers  is  in  utter  disregard  of  that  principle. 

Xow,  if  the  function  of  legislating  be  in  the  long  run  best  and 
most  satisfactorily  performed  by  a  representative  body  composed 
of  men  coming  from  every  locality  and  every  part  of  a  State,  and 
if  it  would  be  unsafe  to  vest  the  law-making  power  in  the  executive 
branch,  does  it  not  likewise  follow  that  the  equally  important  func- 
tion of  selecting  candidates  for  executive  and  judicial  office  and 
formulating  party  policies  and  platforms  will  be  best  performed 
by  a  representative  body,  such  as  our  delegate  conventions  were. 
instead  of  being  left  to  the  mass  of  voters  ?  If  in  legislation  more 
intelligent  and  wiser  action  be  still  likely  to  result  from  a  repre- 
sentative body  than  from  the  confusion  of  a  multitude  of  voters, 
is  it  not  also  likely  that  more  intelligent  and  wiser  selection  of 
executive  officers  will  be  made  by  chosen  representatives  as  in 
nominating  conventions  than  by  the  people  at  large  I 

It  should  be  borne  in  mind  that  our  system  of  republican  gov- 
ernment differs  from  other  representative  governments  in  the 
practical  and  effective  separation  of  powers.  In  England  and  in 
France  the  legislators,  that  is  the  delegates  or  representatives 
elected  by  the  people,  appoint  and  control  all  executive  and  admin- 
istrative officers  and  carry  on  the  executive  and  administrative 
branches  of  government.  There  the  legislative  and  executive 
powers  are  practically  united  in  the  same  body.  Under  our  system 
the  legislators  do  not  elect  or  appoint  executive  officers.     It  is. 


Doc.  Xo.  37  S 

therefore,  essential,  if  the  representative  principle  is  to  be  main- 
tained, that  executive  officers  should  be  nominated  by  duly  quali- 
fied representatives. 

iSTomination  of  executive  officers  by  direct  primaries  will  in- 
evitably be  subversive  of  the  true  spirit  of  the  representative  sys- 
tem, and  the  secrecy  of  the  vote  in  the  nominating  primaries  will 
ultimately  be  destructive  of  all  sense  of  responsibility.  The  en- 
rolled voter  marking  his  ballot  in  secret  will  frequently  feel  no 
sense  of  responsibility  or  accountability  to  his  neighbors  and  fel- 
low-citizens, and  will  frequently  fail  to  appreciate  that  the  vote  is 
a  sacred  trust  to  be  exercised  for  the  good  of  the  community.  The 
secrecy  of  the  primary  vote  thus  does  a  great  moral  mischief  in 
destroying  the  sense  of  political  responsibility  and  accountability. 
A  public  declaration  in  connection  with  nomination  for  office,  in- 
volving as  it  does  a  recommendation  to  other  voters  of  fitness  and 
qualification  for  the  particular  office,  is  a  much  more  effective 
restraint  on  corruption  and  perversion  of  the  popular  vote  than 
any  scheme  of  secrecy  which  leaves  no  one  publicly  responsible  for 
unfit  and  improper  nominations.  In  my  judgment,  the  primary 
system  tends  to  promote  the  nomination  of  self-advertisers,  dema- 
gogues and  wire-pullers  by  irresponsible  minorities,  groups,  fac- 
tions, cabals,  or  secret  societies,  generally  composed  of  persons 
acting  mostly  in  the  dark  and  dominated  or  controlled  by  leaders 
who  cannot  be  held  to  any  accountability,  however  much  they  may 
prostitute  the  political  power  they  exercise. 

The  practice  of  nominating  candidates  for  public  office,  whether 
national,  state,  or  local,  by  means  of  party  conventions,  caucuses, 
or  conferences,  was  introduced  and  long  existed  without  any  statu- 
tory  regulations.  This  practice  sprang  up  normally  and  from  ne- 
cessity as  soon  as  the  increase  in  population  rendered  it  impracti- 
cable for  the  voters  to  come  together  in  mass  or  town  meeting.  The 
body  of  voters,  who  could  not  spend  the  time  necessary  to  investi- 
gate as  to  the  qualifications  of  candidates  or  attend  political  de- 
bates, and  who  could  know  little  or  nothing  of  the  qualifications 
and  character  of  candidates,  naturally  recognized  that  the  best 
and  safest  course  would  be  to  elect  delegates  or  representatives 
from  each  neighborhood,  who,  meeting  delegates  or  representatives 
from  other  districts,  could  exchange  views,  criticize,  discuss  ;m<l 


9  Doc.  No.  :>V 

agree  upon  policies  and  nominations,  and  thus  act  more  intelli- 
gently, advisedly  and  wisely  than  was  otherwise  possible. 

The  growth  of  constituencies,  the  multiplication  of  elective 
offices,  and  the  neglect  of  their  political  duties  by  the  majority 
of  electors  led  to  many  abuses  in  the  conduct  of  nominating  con- 
ventions, and  legislation  became  necessary  in  order  to  prevent 
frauds  in  connection  with  the  conduct  of  primaries  and  conven- 
tions. In  promoting  this  legislation,  it  was  argued  that,  if  citi- 
zens were  assured  the  right  to  be  enrolled  in  the  party  to  which 
they  desired  to  belong  and  to  vote  at  primaries  and  freely  to  ex- 
ercise their  choice  for  delegates  to  conventions,  they  would  be 
stimulated  to  take  part  in  the  primaries,  and  that  this  would  re- 
sult in  preventing  party  nominations  for  office  from  being  con- 
trolled by  those  who  made  politics  their  business  or  used  improper 
or  corrupt  methods.  Hence  the  primary  reform  measures  intro- 
duced by  legislation  in  our  State  in  the  nineties. 

These  measures,  it  is  true,  proved  to  be  very  disappointing  to 
many  of  their  promoters.  This  was  not  because  the  statutes  were 
in  themselves  defective  or  inadequate,  but  because  it  was  found  to 
be  impossible  by  mere  legislative  enactment  to  induce  a  majority 
of  the  electors  to  enroll  in  their  parties  or  to  take  any  active  part 
or  interest  in  politics.  Although  under  these  primary  laws  the 
nominating  conventions  could  at  any  time  have  been  readily  con- 
trolled by  the  electorate  at  large,  had  the  voters  only  taken  the 
trouble  to  enroll  and  vote  at  the  primaries,  great  dissatisfaction 
was  fomented  or  manufactured,  and  a  clamor  arose  for  the  total 
abolition  of  the  convention  and  the  introduction  of  the  experiment 
of  a  direct  primary  system,  upon  the  notion  that  this  would  stimu- 
late greater  political  interest,  enable  the  enrolled  voters  to  control 
and  elect  their  own  candidates,  bring  nominations  closer  to  the 
people,  and  curtail  and  ultimately  destroy  the  power  of  the  poli- 
ticians and  bosses.  The  new  experiment  was  based  upon  the  as- 
sumption that  if  enrolled  electors  could  vote  directly  for  candi- 
dates instead  of  for  representatives  to  nominating  conventions, 
they  would  thereby  be  induced  to  take  a  more  active  interest  in 
politics,  to  overthrow  the  control  or  domination  of  bosses  and  pro- 
fessional politicians,  and  to  make  better  selections  than  had  ever 
been  made  before, — in  a  word,  it  was  assumed,  in  the  face  of  all  ex- 


Doc.  i\o.  37  10 

perience  to  the  contrary,  that,  if  the  voters  had  the  direct  power, 
they  would  perform  their  political  duties,  that  better  qualified  and 
more  competent  and  independent  candidates  would  offer  them- 
selves or  somehow  would  be  brought  to  the  attention  of  the  elec- 
torate, and  that  nominations  would  then  represent  the  will  or 
choice  of  the  majority  in  each  party,  and  not  the  will  of  minori- 
ties or  the  choice  of  bosses.  How  the  majority  were  to  ascertain 
the  qualifications  of  particular  candidates  and  co-operate  to  secure 
the  nomination  of  the  best  qualified  were  left  in  the  air.  It 
seemed  to  be  thought,  following  the  absurd  and  exploded  doctrines 
of  Rousseau,  that  the  people  would  always  want,  and,  by  a  process 
of  political  inspiration,  would  intuitively  and  instinctively  select 
the  best  men  for  public  office. 

The  result  so  far  has  refuted  all  these  assumptions,  hopes  and 
promises.  The  people  at  large  do  not  take  part  in  the  primaries 
and  the  political  machines  are  more  powerful  than  ever.  Thus, 
in  New  York  County,  the  Republican  vote  for  Governor  at  the 
direct  primaries  of  1914  was  only  23,305,  out  of  a  total  enroll- 
ment of  50,108  and  a  vote  in  November  of  85,478 ;  the  Democratic 
primary  vote  was  only  48,673  out  of  a  total  enrollment  of  132,- 
693  and  a  vote  in  November  of  90,666,  and  the  Progressive  pri- 
mary vote  was  only  6,972  out  of  a  total  enrollment  of  19,705  and 
a  vote  in  November  of  5,604.  It  will  be  readily  perceived  from 
these  figures  that  a  very  small  minority  of  the  voters  in  each  party 
took  the  trouble  to  participate  in  the  direct  primary  elections, 
even  in  the  case  of  the  nomination  for  Governor  of  our  State, 
as  to  which  there  was  an  exciting  contest  in  each  party.  An 
examination  of  the  figures  throughout  the  whole  State  will  show 
that  the  voters  in  nearly  all  districts  took  no  more  interest  in 
direct  primary  elections  for  nominations  than  they  were  accus- 
tomed to  take  under  the  old  convention  system  and  that  the  con- 
trolling power  is  still  being  exercised  by  the  organization,  but  now- 
acting  in  secret  and  utterly  irresponsible.  For  example,  the  Re- 
publican primary  vote  for  Governor  in  Bronx  County  was  o.l'T)! 
against  a  Republican  vote  of  29,865  in  November,  and  in  Rich- 
mond County  the  Republican  primary  vote  for  Governor  was  98  I 
against  a  Republican  vote  of  5,477  in  November.  It  is  probably 
correct  to  assume  that  not  one-half  of  the  Republican  or  Demo- 
cratic voters  now  enroll,  and  thai,  on  the  average,  less  than  one- 


11  Doc.  Xo.  37 

lialf  of  the  enrolled  voters  take  the  trouble  to  go  to  the  primaries 
even  when  there  is  a  serious  contest,  as  was  the  case  last  year  for 
Governor.     As  there  were  then  three  proposed  Republican  can- 
didates —  Whitman,  Hedges  and  Hinman  —  the  result  was  that  a 
one-sixth  of  the  Republican  vote  in  Xovember  might  have  been 
sufficient  to  cany  the  primaries,  the  total  Republican  vote  for  Gov- 
ernor having  been  686,701  as  against  a  total  primary  vote  of 
226,037  for  the  three  candidates.     Under  the  present  direct  pri- 
maries, the  voters  of  a  small  portion  of  the  State  can  put  a  can- 
didate in  nomination  by  petition;  any  number  of  names  can  be 
put  on  the  official  primary  ballot,  and  a  candidate  may  be  put  in 
nomination  by  a  very  small  minority  vote  confined  to  one  locality. 
In  fact,  twenty  or  more  names  can  be  placed  by  petition  on  the 
official  primary  ballot  of  any  party  as  candidates  for  any  elective 
office,  and  the  name  of  the  person  receiving  the  most  votes  will 
l>e  that  of  the  candidate  of  a  great  party,  to  whose  support  the 
party  will  be  committed  and  for  whose  conduct  in  office  the  party 
will  be   responsible,   although  the  successful  candidate  may  be 
entirely  unknown  to  nineteen-twentieths  of  the  voters   at  that 
particular  primary.     Under  the  primary  system,  in  view  of  the 
small  number  of  those  participating  in  primaries,  an  insignificant 
percentage  of  the  voters  at  a  primary  could  nominate  a  candidate 
of  whose  qualifications  and  personal  character  the  majority  of 
the  party  were  wholly  ignorant,  or  a  candidate  whom  an  over- 
whelming  majority   would   repudiate.      Sulzer   came   very  near 
carrying  the  direct  primary  of  the  Progressive  party.     This  shows 
how  readily  the  direct  primary  system  engenders  factions  and  ir- 
responsibility, and  how  unfit  it,  is  for  securing  the  expression  of 
the  intelligent  and  instructed  will  of  the  majority  of  any  party. 
^Moreover,  there  is  no  way  of  ascertaining  for  whom  petitions  are 
being  circulated;  no  publicity  is  required  even  after  the  time  for 
filing  petitions,  and  the  great  majority  of  enrolled  voters  generally 
have  no  idea  of  the  candidates  for  office  on  the  official  primary 
ballot  until  they  open  the  official  primary  ballot  at  their  polling 
place.     The  press  is  either  unreliable  or  partisan,  or  it  fails  ade- 
quately to  discuss  the  qualifications  and  character  of  the  can- 
didates. 

I  submit  that  it  is  absurd  to  claim  that  such  a  method  of  nom- 
inating State  officers  to  administer  government  for  a  population 


Doc.  No.  37  12 

of  over  10,000,000  is  more  likely  to  secure  competent  and  trust- 
worthy candidates  or  to  express  the  real  preference  and  the  sober 
and  intelligent  judgment  of  the  majority  of  the  voters  of  each 
party  than  the  method  of  nominating  State  officers  by  public  con- 
ventions composed  of  delegates  and  representatives  of  the  voters 
from  each  assembly  or  election  district  of  the  State,  proceeding 
in  the  open  with  full  opportunity  for  investigation,  discussion 
and  criticism. 

The  Direct  Primary  Law  of  1911  (L.  1911,  ch.  891)  abolished 
all  conventions  in  the  State  of  New  York  except  the  State  con- 
vention, and  the  Direct  Primary  Law  of  1913  (L.  1913,  ch.  820) 
abolished  the  State  convention,  striking  the  article  on  conventions 
and  even  the  definition  of  a  convention  from  the  text  of  the  law. 
Although  the  new  law  contains  in  section  45  a  provision  that  noth- 
ing therein  contained  shall  prevent  a  party  from  holding  a  party 
convention,  to  be  constituted  in  such  manner  and  under  such 
powers  in  relation  to  formulating  party  platforms  and  policies 
and  the  transaction  of  business  relating  to  the  regulation  of  party 
affairs  as  the  rules  and  regulations  of  the  party  provide,  not  in- 
consistent with  the  Election  Law,  it  was  clearly  the  intention  of 
its  framers  that  such  party  conventions  should  not  deal  with  the 
most  important  subject  which  parties  had  theretofore  dealt  with, 
namely,  the  nomination  of  candidates  for  public  office.  Indeed, 
section  4(5,  as  amended  in  1913,  expressly  provides  that  designa- 
tions of  candidates  for  party  nominations  shall  be  "  by  petition 
only  "  in  the  manner  provided  in  the  law. 

The  conventions  of  the  two  great  political  parties  held  at  Sara- 
toga last  year,  at  which  the  party  platforms  in  respect  of  the  ap- 
proaching Constitutional  Convention  were  adopted  and  fifteen 
delegates-at-large  "  recommended,"  were  wholly  unofficial  and  un- 
regulated by  law.  What  was  practically  the  nomination  by  the  con- 
ventions of  candidates  for  delegates-at-large  was  unauthorized  and 
operated  only  as  a  mere  recommendation.  They  had  to  be  nom- 
inated by  petition  as  fully  as  if  the  conventions  had  never  con- 
vened. These  conventions  thus  nominated  delegates  because  they 
realized  and  every  thinking  man  in  the  State  appreciated  that  it 
would  be  absurd  to  leave  the  selection  and  nomination  of  fifteen 
delegates-at-large  to  the  mass  of  enrolled  voters  who  would  have 


L3  Doc.  No.  37 

no  opportunity  for  conference  and  exchange  of  views  in  respect 
of  the  qualifications  and  character  of  such  candidates.  Some 
informed,  responsible  and  representative  body  of  men  had  to 
act,  and  therefore  the  conventions  acted.  They,  however,  refrained 
from  considering  candidates  for  the  great  office  of  Governor,  on  the 
theory  that  it  would  be  violating  the  spirit  and  intent  of  the 
Election  Law  to  take  any  action  in  regard  to  candidates  for  that 
office.  That  most  important  and  vital  subject  was  left  to  the 
hazard  of  petitions  circulated  among  the  enrolled  voters  through- 
out the  State.  There  was  no  organization  of  any  kind  among 
the  voters,  or  means  of  communication  and  exchange  of  views  or 
debate,  except  what  is  known  as  the  political  organization;  but 
it  was  confidently  anticipated  that  the  organization  of  each  party 
w7ould  determine,  or  at  least  would  have  it  within  its  power  to 
determine,  who  the  candidates  of  that  party  should  be.  Such 
proved  to  be  the  case.  ISTo  candidate  was  nominated  at  the  direct 
primaries  for  a  State  office  unless  he  was  supported  by  the  regular 
organization  or  machine  of  his  party.  And  that,  I  believe,  will 
be  the  practical  result  of  direct  primaries  in  nine  cases  out  of 
ten,  and  more  readily  and  frequently  and  unsatisfactorily  than 
under  the  old  convention  system. 

Careful  observers  of  the  operation  of  the  primary  law  last 
year  in  this  State,  and  in  other  States  for  several  years,  are 
convinced  that  the  result  of  this  so-called  reform  has  been  not 
merely  to  increase  the  power  of  the  regular  organization  or  ma- 
chine but  to  render  it  utterly  irresponsible.  The  organization 
now  acts  behind  closed  doors  and  without  accountability  to  anyone 
except  its  own  inner  circle.  The  leaders  have  only  to  whisper 
their  orders  over  the  telephone  to  the  workers  in  each  district, 
preserving  no  record,  and  the  desired  result  is  accomplished.  If 
an  unfit  and  improper  nomination  is  made,  the  leaders  can  dis- 
claim all  responsibility  and  say  that  such  is  the  will  of  the  sov- 
ereign people.  As  the  vote  at  the  primary  is  secret,  no  one  can  be 
blamed  ;  there  is  no  individual  or  group  of  individuals  upon  whom 
responsibility  can  be  fastened.  If  it  be  argued  that  there  is  actual 
responsibility  and  that  everyone  knows  it,  then  I  answer  that  this 
is  only  by  admitting  that,  after  all,  the  secret  machine  or  boss 
is  in  fact  responsible  and  still  rules,  and  now  more  effectively 
than  ever. 


Doc.  Xo.  37  U 

As  has  been  pointed  out  by  many  able  writers,  the  convention 
system  in  the  past  has  been  of  inestimable  service  in  this  country. 
It  afforded  the  highest  test  of  a  political  representative  institution 
in  a  democratic  community  and  the  soundest  and  purest  applica- 
tion of  the  principle  of  representation  or  delegated  authority;  it 
operated  to  bind  party  elements  firmly  together,  to  afford  full 
opportunity  for  the  exchange  of  views  and  criticism  and  debate, 
for  the  propagation  of  principles,  for  the  conciliation  of  factions ; 
it  inspired  enthusiastic  party  life ;  it  was,  if  honestly  conducted, 
a  thoroughly  representative  and  deliberative  body,  and  it  lay  at 
the  foundation  of  party  success  and  the  maintenance  and  per- 
petuation of  party  principles  and  policies  and  political  faith  and 
devotion.  In  a  word,  the  convention  was  and  still  is  the  best 
instrument  ever  devised  for  securing  concert  of  choice  and  re- 
sponsible and  intelligent  action  by  large  bodies  of  voters  belong- 
ing to  the  same  political  party  and  believing  in  the  same  political 
faith,  principles,  or  policies. 

I  am  not  at  all  blind  to  the  fact  that  there  have  been  great 
abuses  of  the  convention  system,  and  that  conventions  have  been 
corruptly  organized  or  conducted.  But  I  know  of  no  forms  of 
abuse  or  corruption  which  could  not  have  been  remedied  by  ap- 
propriate and  intelligent  legislation,  or  which  could  not  have 
been  prevented  by  action  of  the  voters  if  the  legislation  of  the 
past  twenty-five  years  had  been  generally  availed  of  by  the  ma- 
jority in  each  party.  The  control  of  all  nominations  was  in  the 
hands  of  the  majority  if  they  had  only  taken  the  trouble  to 
onroll  and  vote  at  primary  elections  for  competent  representa- 
tives. There  is  no  practical  remedy  for  abuse  of  power,  fraud, 
or  corruption  in  nominations  for  office  but  the  participation  in 
politics  of  all  voters  as  a  duty  of  citizenship.  The  notion  tli  i1 
the  direct  primary  would  eliminate  the  professional  politician 
and  the  boss  has  been  shown  to  be  false  in  every  State  where  the 
scheme  has  been  tried.  Indeed,  quite  the  contrary  lias  been  the 
result,  and  the  last  condition  is  worse  than  the  first;  for  to  repeal 
myself,  manipulators,  wire-pullers  and  political  bosses  now  work 
in  secret  and  by  underground  channels  without  any  responsibility 
or  accountability  whatever,  and  are,  nevertheless,  able  cynically 
to  point  to  the  direct  primary  as  the  expression  of  the  people's 


15  Doc  X<>.  .",7 

sovereign  will  — a  primary  which  may  be  carried  by  a  very  small 
minority  of  the  party. 

I  assume  that  all  the  members  of  the  Constitutional  Convention 
believe  that  the  existence  of  political  parties  is  essential  to  the 
success  of  free  government  and  to  permanence  and  stability  of 
political  policy,  and  that  the  perpetuation  of  party  government 
is  desirable  for  the  welfare  and  best  interests  of  this  State.  Men 
cannot  secure  results  and  compass  their  ends  in  politics,  any 
more  than  in  most  other  human  concerns  and  matters  requiring 
concerted  action,  except  by  co-operation,  discipline  and  responsi- 
bility. The  value  of  the  service  rendered  to  the  American  people 
by  the  great  political  parties  is  incalculable,  and  if  these  parties 
are  to  be  disrupted  and  their  organization  and  cohesiveness  under- 
mined, the  result  must  inevitable  be  the  most  serious  injury  to  the 
body  politic.  Whether  we  regard  political  parties  as  organizations 
of  men  believing  in  the  same  political  faith,  principles  and  poli- 
cies and  uniting  to  introduce  or  uphold  those  principles  and  poli- 
cies, on  the  one  hand,  or  regard  parties  merely  as  organizations 
to  secure  office  and  administer  government,  on  the  other  hand — - 
both  of  which  aspects  present  patriotic  motives  —  it  is  desirable 
for  the  permanent  welfare  of  the  people  of  every  free  country  that 
parties  should  be  maintained,  and  particularly  that  there  should 
be  two  great  responsible  parties,  each  striving  for  control  and 
ready  to  assume  the  responsibility  of  government  and  of  the  adop- 
tion of  particular  measures.  A  public  official  who  belongs  to  a 
great  political  party  and  owes  his  preferment  to  that  party  is 
under  a  double  sense  of  responsibility  for  efficiency,  honesty  and 
consistency  in  public  office.  He  has  a  sense  of  responsibility  and 
duty  to  the  State  as  a  whole,  and  he  has  a  sense  of  responsibility 
and  duty  to  his  party,  and  both  are  moral  factors  of  inestimable 
worth  in  securing  integrity,  efficiency  and  industry  in  public  office. 

The  movement  in  favor  of  abolishing  the  convention  system 
and  introducing  direct  nominating  primaries,  in  its  real  origin, 
sprang  not  from  a  desire  to  reform  the  existing  political  parties 
but  to  subvert  and  destroy  the  American  system  of  government 
by  political  parties.  The  movement  was  later  taken  up  by  men 
who  sincerely  desired  to  reform  party  management  and  correct 
party  abuses,    who   conscientiously   despaired   of   reform   within 


Doc.  No.  37  16 

the  parties  themselves,  and  who  conceived  and  finally  came  to 
believe  that  betterment  could  only  be  brought  about  by  uprooting 
and  casting  aside  all  the  party  machinery,  organization  and  dis- 
cipline which  the  practical  experience  of  over  a  century  had  built 
up.  The  plea  of  bringing  the  government  back  to  the  people  was 
catching  and  plausible,  and  it  found  ready  response  in  the  deeply 
rooted  dislike  of  party  machinery,  party  discipline  and  party  con- 
stancy on  the  part  of  those  who  habitually  neglect  all  attention  to 
politics  and  the  political  duties  of  citizenship  except  during  peri- 
ods of  popular  excitement  and  upheaval.  Although  I  am  one  of 
those  who  believe  in  independence  in  politics  and  in  the  right  and 
duty  of  every  citizen  to  vote  against  his  party  if  in  his  judgment 
the  public  interests  so  require,  I  profoundly  believe  that  party 
government  and  party  organization  and  machinery  are  absolutely 
essential  under  our  form  of  government. 

Political  parties  in  America  have  given  stability  to  govern- 
mental policies  and  have  created  the  only  effective  restraint  upon 
disintegration  and  individual  caprice  or  demagogism.  There  must 
be  coherence  in  political  forces ;  there  must  be  concentration  and 
direction  of  the  political  energy  of  communities;  there  must  be 
some  systematic  and  practical  method  for  investigating  the  com- 
petency of  and  selecting  public  officials;  there  must  be  stability, 
harmony  and  co-operation  in  governmental  policies.  These  can 
only  be  secured  in  the  long  run  by  and  through  permanently  or- 
ganized and  disciplined  political  parties.  ]STo  other  means  has  yet 
been  discovered  by  which  effectively  to  express  political  opinion, 
to  secure  stability  in  governmental  administration  and  policies, 
and  to  effectuate  the  real  and  permanent  judgment  of  the  people 
and  promote  their  best  interests. 

The  President  of  the  United  States  some  years  ago,  in  referring 
to  attacks  upon  party  government  in  the  United  States,  used  the 
following  striking  language,  which  I  think  should  be  recalled : 

"I  know  that  it  has  been  proposed  by  enthusiastic,  but  not  too 
practical,  reformers  to  do  away  with  parties  by  some  legerdemain 
of  governmental  reconstruction,  accompanied  and  supplemented 
by  some  rehabilitation,  devoutly  to  bo  wished,  of  the  virtues 
least  commonly  controlling  in  fallen  human  nature;  but  ;t  seems 
to  me  that  it  would  be  more  difficult  and  loss  desirable  than  these 
amiable  persons  suppose  to  conduct  a  governmenl  of  the  many  by 


17  Doc.  Xo.  .37 

means  of  any  other  device  than  party  organization,  and  that  the 
great  need  is,  not  to  get  rid  of  parties,  but  to  find  and  use  some 
expedient  by  which  they  can  be  managed  and  made  amenable 
from  day  to  day  to  public  opinion.  Whatever  their  faults  and 
abuses,  party  machines  are  absolutely  necessary  under  our  exist- 
ing electoral  arrangements,  and  are  necessary  chiefly  for  keeping 
the  several  segments  of  parties  together.  *  *  *  It  is  im- 
portant to  keep  this  in  mind.  Otherwise,  when  we  analyze  party 
action,  we  shall  fall  into  the  too  common  error  of  thinking  that 
we  are  analyzing  disease.  As  a  matter  of  fact  the  whole  tiling  is 
just  as  normal  and  natural  as  any  other  political  development. 
The  part  that  party  has  played  in  this  country  has  been  both 
necessary  and  beneficial,  and  if  bosses,  and  secret  managers  are 
often  undesirable  persons,  playing  their  part  for  their  own  bene- 
fit or  glorification  rather  than  for  the  public  good,  they  are  at 
least  the  natural  fruits  of  the  tree.  It  has  borne  fruit  good  and 
bad,  sweet  and  bitter,  wholesome  and  corrupt,  but  it  is  native  to 
our  air  and  practice  and  can  be  uprooted  only  by  an  entire  change 
of  system. 

I,  therefore,  urge  upon  the  Constitutional  Convention  the  res- 
toration of  nominating  state  conventions  for  elective  state  offices. 
I  do  so  because  I  believe  that  they  are  the  best  means  of  main- 
taining political  parties,  of  formulating  their  principles  and  poli- 
cies, of  purifying  and  disciplining  their  management,  of  stimu- 
lating political  enthusiasm  and  disinterestedness,  and  of  selecting 
and  nominating  fit  and  representative  individuals  as  candidates 
for  high  public  office.  I  further  suggest  that  the  nominees  of  any 
such  convention  should  not  need  any  further  designation  than  the 
filing  of  a  certificate  by  the  proper  convention  officers.  If  it  be 
felt,  however,  that  the  direct  primary  system  should  be  continued 
for  the  purpose  of  party  nominations,  then  it  should  be  provided 
that  the  name  of  the  nominee  of  the  convention  should  be  placed 
on  the  official  primary  ballot  with  the  designation  "  nominated  by 
convention."  This  would  enable  the  enrolled  voters  to  ratify  or 
overrule  the  action  of  the  convention.  I  am,  however,  convinced 
that  this  nominating  primary  would  impose  an  unnecessary  burden 
upon  the  electorate,  and  that  it  would  be  a  mistake  to  increase 
the  number  of  elections.  We  would  then  have  three  elections; 
first,  of  delegates  to  the  nominating  convention,  second,  at  the 
official  primaries,  and  third,  at  the  general  election.  It  seems  to 
me  that  it  should  answer  every  purpose  if  adequate  provision  were 


Doc.  Xo.  37  18 

retained  for  independent  nominations  by  petition.  This  would 
enable  voters  belonging  to  any  party  to  place  candidates  in  oppo- 
sition to  the  nominees  of  the  convention  if  they  were  dissatisfied 
with  those  nominees. 

Assuming  that  we  are  to  continue  the  system  of  electing  judges 
to  our  highest  judicial  offices,  that  is,  judges  of  the  Court  of 
Appeals  and  justices  of  the  Supreme  Court,  then  I  submit 
that  candidates  for  these  very  important  offices  should  be  nomi- 
nated by  conventions  and  not  by  direct  primaries.  I  regard  this 
as  even  more  essential  for  judicial  office  than  in  the  case  of  nomi- 
nation for  executive  office. 

The  qualities  required  in  a  candidate  for  high  judicial  office 
are  knowledge  of  the  law,  love  of  justice,  high  personal  character, 
calmness,  impartiality  and  independence.  Mere  popularity,  02 
what  so  often  is  necessary  to  popularity,  good-fellowship,  is  the 
last  quality  we  look  for  in  a  judge.  The  self-seeker  and  self -ad- 
vertiser is  seldom  qualified  by  temperament  or  character  for 
judicial  office.  It  requires  the  most  thorough  investigation  as  to 
the  professional  learning,  career  and  conduct  of  a  candidate  and 
the  most  sifting  exchange  of  views  before  any  one  can  select  a 
judicial  candidate  intelligently  and  wisely.  For  want  of  adequate 
means  of  acquiring  information,  the  public  in  such  large  con- 
stituencies as  the  whole  State  of  New  York  (in  the  case  of  judges 
of  the  Court  of  Appeals)  and  as  the  various  judicial  districts  (in 
the  case  of  justices  of  the  Supreme  Court)  cannot  intelligently 
estimate  the  qualifications  of  judicial  candidates.  It  seems  to  me 
preposterous  to  argue  that  in  parties  composed  of  hundreds  of 
thousands  of  enrolled  electors  dispersed  throughout  the  State,  the 
voters  can  investigate,  or  exchange  views,  or  intelligently  act  in 
regard  to  the  qualifications  of  lawyers  who  are  proposed  as  candi- 
dates for  judicial  office, —  almost  as  preposterous  as  if  we  were  to 
select  judicial  candidates  by  lot  from  the  name-;  placed  on  the 
official  primary  list. 

The  test  of  fitness  for  judicial  office  should  indisputably  be 
higher  and  more  technical  than  for  other  offices.  That  test  must 
require  special  capacity  and  character,  to  be  ascertained  by  careful 
investigation,  exchange  of  views,  open  discussion  and  comparison 
of  merits  by  responsible  delegates  or  representatives  charged  with 


10  Doc.  No.  37 

that  particular  duty  and  acting  in  public  and  personally  account- 
l)lo  for  mistake,  perversion,  or  corruption.  This  test  can  be  besl 
secured  by  the  convention  system ;  practically  it  cannot  be  secured 
at  all  by  any  system  of  secret  direct  primaries. 

Eeform  in  the  selection  of  judges,  if  their  selection  is  to  be 
by  election,  lies  not  in  schemes  to  reform  human  nature  and  to 
destroy  publicity  and  responsibility,  but  in  making  the  voters- 
appreciate  that  the  government  is  theirs,  that  political  power  is 
theirs,  that  theirs  is  the  duty  to  send  competent  representatives 
to  conventions,  thai  theirs  is  the  responsibility  of  electing  com- 
petent men,  and  that  they  are  vitally  interested  in  having  a  com- 
petent, impartial  and  independent  judiciary.  Political  conven- 
tions will  be  reliable  and  responsive  if  the  people  will  only  sec 
to  it  that  competent,  honest  and  patriotic  men  are  elected  to 
represent  them.  There  is  no  other  course  unless  we  uproot  our 
whole  system  of  republican  government. 

Ten  years  of  experimenting  with  our  Election  Law  have  pro- 
duced the  present  hodge-podge  under  which  no  election  is  con- 
ducted without  error  and  without  inviting  a  lawsuit  and  from 
which  all  but  experts  and  professional  politicians  turn  away  in 
irritation  and  disgust.  The  net  result  has  been  to  complicate  our 
elections  and  make  them  less  and  less  responsive  to  the  best  public 
opinion,  and  more  and  more  subject  to  the  control  of  professional 
politicians,  wire-pullers  and  bosses. 

In  conclusion  I  earnestly  submit  that  there  can  be  no  greater 
menace  to  our  political  institutions  and  to  government  by  the  peo- 
ple than  the  prevailing  tendency  to  weaken  and  impair  the  repre- 
sentative principle  in  our  governments  by  attempting  to  nominate 
executive  and  judicial  officers  through  direct  secret  primaries 
instead  of  through  public  conventions  composed  of  delegates  or 
representatives  duly  chosen  by  the  enrolled  voters  of  the  party  and 
charged  with  the  duty  of  selecting  competent  and  honest  candi- 
dates and  directly  accountable'  to  the  locality  they  represent  for  the 
failure  to  perform  that  duty.  These  delegates  represent  the  peo- 
ple of  the  various  districts  of  the  State;  they  come  together  in 
public ;  they  exchange  and  discuss  views,  or  at  any  rate  have  full 
opportunity  for  debate  and  criticism ;  they  vote  in  public  for  this 
or  that  candidate,  and  then  they  return  to  their  neighbors,  to  those 


Doc.  Itfo.   37  20 

who  sent  them  and  whom  they  represent,  and  face  accountability 
and  responsibility.  How  much  more  likely  is  such  a  proceeding 
to  secure  competent  and  honest  candidates  than  the  present  sys- 
tem of  leaving  the  voters  at  large  to  slip  into  dimly  lighted  booths 
and  secretly  place  a  cross  on  unidentifiable  ballots!  The  con- 
vention system  is  sound  and  should  be  preserved;  it  alone  will 
make  our  parties  and  form  of  government  live,  and  in  casting  the 
representative  principle  aside,  as  is  necessarily  done  in  the  direct 
primary  system  of  nominations  for  state  and  judicial  office,  we  are 
beginning  a  process  which,  if  not  checked,  will  end  in  what  Lincoln 
called  political  suicide. 


REMARKS  OF  D.  CADY  HERRICK 

The  Chairman. —  Gentlemen,  we  will  now  hear  from  former 
Justice  D.  Cady  Herrick. 

Justice  D.  Cady  Herrick. — Mr.  Chairman  and  gentlemen: 
I  don't  know  that  I  can  add  a  great  deal  to  what  has  been  sale! 
from  time  to  time  upon  the  question  of  personal  registration.  I 
am  only  here  because  of  the  insistence  and  persistence  of  Mr. 
Saxe,  who  thought,  perhaps,  that  because  I  had  argued  two  or 
three  cases  in  the  Court  of  Appeals  in  relation  to  personal  reg- 
istration, possibly  I  know  something  about  it  that  the  rest  of  you 
do  not.  In  that  I  think  he  is  mistaken,  but  there  are  a  few  things 
that  I  might  call  your  attention  to  which  may  possibly  be  new  to 
some  of  you,  possibly  not. 

The  general  subject  of  registration  is  considered  at  a  good  deal 
of  length  in  the  third  volume  of  Lincoln's  constitutional  history 
of  the  State,  which  you  have  in  your  convention  library,  and 
which  doubtless  you  resort  to  from  time  to  time,  so  that  it  is  need- 
less for  me  to  go  into  any  discussion  of  this  subject  at  any  great 
length. 

Of  coarse,  we  all  realize  this,  that  it  is  of  the  greatest  impor- 
tance, under  our  form  of  government  that  our  suffrage  should  be 
pure,  that  our  elections  should  be  honest;  that  only  those  who  are 
honestly  entitled  to  vote  should  be  permitted  to  vote,  and,  for  the 
purpose  of  insuring  those  results  as  far  as  possible  our  registra- 
tion laws  have  been  enacted  from  time  to  time. 


21  Doc.  Xo.  .".7 

The  principle  underlying  it  is  undisputed.  The  application  of 
it  has  been  different  in  different  parts  of  the  State.  In  some 
parts  of  the  State  personal  registration  is  required ;  in  other  parts 
of  the  State  the  inspectors  of  election  can  put  upon  the  registry 
list  for  the  coming  election  all  those  who  voted  at  the  last  elec- 
tion, and  add  such  other  names  as  they  see  fit.  Now,  of  course 
the  opportunities  that  are  open  for  fraud  by  any  defect  in  the 
registration  law  can  be  availed  of  in  any  part  of  the  State, 
whether  it  is  in  the  city  or  whether  it  is  in  the  country. 

One  of  the  learned,  but  simple  minded,  judges  of  the  Court 
of  Appeals,  in  discussing  this  registration  question,  drew  a 
great  distinction  between  the  inhabitants  of  cities  and  the  inhabit- 
ants of  the  country,  that  fraud  was  much  more  apt  to  prevail  in 
the  city  than  it  was  in  the  country ;  dishonest  practices  were  more 
common  than  in  the  country. 

Some  years  ago,  possibly  things  have  changed  since  then,  but 
some  years  ago  I  had  occasion  to  have  some  practical  knowledge 
of  politics  and  of  the  working  of  the  election  law.  The  only  dif- 
ference I  could  find,  because  human  nature  is  the  same  all  over, 
the  only  difference  I  could  find  between  dishonest  election  prac- 
tices in  the  city  and  in  the  country  was  that  the  countryman,  as 
a  rule,  was  more  intelligent  and  clever  than  the  politicians  of 
the  same  grade  in  the  cities. 

And  I  think  that  will  hold  true  today.  I  think,  that  there  is 
more  corruption  outside  of  the  big  cities  than  in  them  on  Elec- 
tion Day.  My  observation  in  the  past,  and  what  I  have  heard 
of  recent  years,  is  that  the  great  amount  of  moneys  that  are  raised 
to  be  used  on  Election  Day  are  used  outside  the  great  cities,  and 
not  in.  If  there  is  any  protection  to  be  cast  around  the  ballot 
box,  if  there  are  any  safeguards  against  improper  registration,  it  is 
just  as  much  needed  in  one  part  of  the  State  as  it  is  in  the  other. 

In  times  past  when  the  question  as  to  whether  there  should  be 
personal  registration  in  the  country  districts  was  being  discussed 
it  was  said  that  it  was  inconvenient  for  many  people  to  go  person- 
ally before  the  boards  of  registration,  that  in  many  instances  it 
would  require  miles  of  travel  and  that  was  too  much  to  ask  of  them 
to  go  to  the  polling  places  first  to  register  and  then  upon  another 
dav  to  vote. 


Doc.  No.  37  22 

In  addition  to  that,  it  was  said  that  the  country  people  knew 
each  other;  knew  whether  they  were  entitled  to  vote  or  not  and 
that  the  inspectors  of  election  knew.  As  Mr.  Guthrie  said  a 
little  while  ago  in  the  course  of  his  speech,  that  down  in  Nassau 
County  they  all  knew  each  other,  and  knew  whether  they  were 
entitled  to  vote  or  to  have  their  names  placed  upon  the  register. 

Since  this  question  of  personal  registration  was  first  discussed 
many  years  ago,  the  character  of  the  population  in  the  interior  of 
this  State  has  greatly  changed.  You  take  in  many  of  the  counties, 
many  of  the  election  districts,  it  is  possibly  true  that  formerly  the 
people  knew  each  other  fairly  well,  and  knew  as  to  whether 
Herrick  resided  upon  that  farm  and  Smith  upon  another  farm, 
how  long  he  had  resided  there,  and  whether  he  was  a  citizen  and 
whether  he  was  not.  But  take  it  today,  there  are  thousands  and 
thousands  of  farm  laborers  in  the  State,  and  all  you  people  who 
reside  in  the  country  know  that.  I  have  some  knowledge  of  it, 
because  I  am  interested  in  farm  properties ;  they  are  engaged  by 
the  month,  two  or  three  or  four  or  five  or  six  months,  and  then 
they  flit  to  some  other  place.  Possibly  in  the  same  town,  possibly 
in  the  same  county,  possibly  in  another  part  of  the  State,  or  an- 
other State,  and  they  are  here,  there  and  all  over.  How  are  you 
going  to  keep  track  of  them?  They  appear  and  rightfully  appear, 
upon  the  registry  this  year  and  vote,  and  their  names  are  carried 
over  to  the  registry  list  next  year.  Then  they  may  be  far  distant, 
who  knows  ?  They  may  be  still  entitled  to  vote  there,  although 
they  are  not  on  the  same  farm  where  they  were  employed  this 
year.  So  that  conditions  I  think  in  the  country  have  largely 
changed  from  what  they  were  years  ago.  We  cannot  go  back  very 
well  to  the  old  halcyon  days  when  politics  were  pure  in  this  State, 
and  when  they  used  to  run  the  State  barge  up  the  canal  with 
25  or  30  people  upon  it,  and  vote  at  every  election  district  as 
they  went  along,  the  elections  continuing  for  three  days,  but  we 
can  return,  I  think,  to  some  of  the  things  that  used  to  be  done 
years  ago. 

We  can  enact  a  law  which  permits  personal  registration  without 
the  inconveniences  that  have  been  complained  of  so  much,  and 
which  have  prevented  the  enactment  of  laws  for  personal  regis- 
tration. 


23  Dor.    No.    37 

Personal  registration  is  almost  a  necessity,  if  we  are  to  have 
clean  registry  lists.  When  some  one  else  is  authorized  to  place 
my  name  upon  the  list  and  does  so,  and  it  is  improperly  there  I 
cannot  be  punished,  so  that  one  great  means  of  enforcing  the 
purity  of  election  is  lost.  The  possible  inconveniences  that  may 
result  to  voters  by  compelling  them  to  apply  in  person  should 
not  be  permitted  to  interfere  with  the  principle  that  lies  back  of 
the  requirement  for  personal  registration.  It  seems  to  me  that 
personal  registration  should  be  required  all  over  the  State  but 
if  you  are  not  prepared  to  go  to  that  extent,  let  me  suggest  this 
to  you :  That,  upon  the  eve  of  every  Presidental  election,  within 
a  given  time  before  that  election,  personal  registration  should  be 
required  all  over  the  State.  So  that  once  in  four  years,  at  least, 
we  can  start  with  a  clean  bill  of  men  who  personally  appeared,  and 
have  personally  had  their  names  placed  upon  the  registry  list. 
You  cannot  punish  a  man  today  because  his  name  appears  upon 
a  registry  list,  and  was  placed  there  by  somebody  else.  And  you 
cannot  punish  the  inspectors  very  well  because  they  can  say, 
"  We  always  supposed  that  man  lived  out  there,  and  was  entitled  to 
vote."  You  can  clear  that  up  by  starting  out  with  a  clear  registry 
list  at  least  once  in  four  years.  It  is  not  in  line  with  what  I  was 
called  upon  to  discuss,  and  possibly  not  within  the  purview  of 
what  you  think  you  can  embody  in  the  Constitution,  but  I  made 
this  suggestion  to  the  Legislature  some  years  ago  as  one  means  of 
providing  for  personal  registration  in  the  country  districts.  There 
is  not  any  man  who  is  entitled  to  vote  in  any  of  these  districts 
but  what  once  in  a  while  goes  to  the  post  office  or  to  the  grocery 
store  in  his  election  district.  If  at  any  time  after  the  first  of 
January,  we  will  say,  in  each  year,  you  provide  that  he  can  go 
before  an  election  officer  and,  by  making  the  requisite  affidavits, 
and  filing  that  so  it  is  upon  the  record,  that  his  name  can  be 
placed  upon  the  registry  list ;  and  then  provide  also  for  your 
meetings  of  the  full  board  as  is  required  now,  when  names  can  be 
stricken  off  that  are  not  properly  on,  and  additions  can  be  made 
of  those  not  registered. 

I  don't  know  as  I  have  anything  further  to  say  upon  this  sub- 
ject. It  has  been  discussed  in  the  books  and  in  our  Constitutional 
conventions  in  former  years,  and  it  seems  to  me  almost  the  work 


Doc.   No.  37  24 

of  supererogation  to  come  before  you  and  say  anything  in  relation 
to  it;  but  I  would  like  to  add  one  thing  in  relation  to  the  sub- 
ject that  Mr.  Guthrie  discussed,  and  that  is  upon  the  question  of 
holding  conventions,  and  the  representative  form  of  government, 
with  all  of  which  I  fully  agree. 

Another  thing  I  wish  to  call  your  attention  to  is  this.  If  you 
will  recollect  in  the  old  days  when  we  elected  delegates  to  assem- 
bly district  conventions,  and  then  elected  delegates  from  the  assem- 
bly district  conventions  to  the  State  conventions,  and  then  from  the 
State  conventions  to  the  National  conventions,  you  will  remember 
how  curiously  they  were  graded.  The  ones  that  were  elected 
delegates  to  the  Assembly  District  conventions  were  a  little  above 
the  average  of  the  men  who  voted  for  them,  a  little  better  stand- 
ing in  the  community,  a  little  higher  degree  of  intelligence.  So 
when  you  come  to  elect  your  delegates  from  the  Assembly  District 
conventions  to  the  State  conventions,  there  was  another  gradation 
up,  there  was  another  selection  of  selected  men ;  then,  in  turn  the 
delegates  who  were  elected  by  the  State  convention  to  the  National 
convention  were  still,  as  a  rule  —  I  am  speaking  of  the  roll  of 
delegates  that  you  sent  to  the  National  convention  —  were  a  higher 
class  of  men  than  those  you  sent  to  the  State  conventions,  and  you 
got  in  those  days,  too,  a  class  of  men  to  go  to  conventions  that  you 
could  not  induce  to  go  to  the  Assembly  or  to  the  Senate,  or  even 
to  Congress  because  they  could  not  spend  the  time. 

Just  as  there  are  many  here  in  this  convention  who  are  glad 
to  come  here,  and  proud  to  come  to  the  convention.  The;. 
willing  to  give  up  some  considerable  degree  of  time  and  thought 
and  study  to  it,  that  you  could  not  induce  to  go  to  cither  branch 
of  the  Legislature.  I  will  venture  to  say  that  there  are  a  number 
of  men  of  that  type  in  this  convention. 

Selected  men  to  pass  upon  the  fundamental  law  of  the  State 
under  the  convention  system,  you  had  selected  men  to  pick  out 
State  officers  and  judges,  I  agree  perfectly  with  the  gentleman 
who  is  suggesting  the  thought,  Mr.  Guthrie,  that  the  direel  pri- 
mary may  be  workable  in  small  districts,  where  people  know  each 
other  or  if  they  have  no  personal  acquaintance  with  a  man  who 
is  a  candidate,  they  can  inquire  from  their  next  door  neighbor 
and  ascertain  from  them  what  kind  of  a   man  he  is;  but  under 


25  Doc.  Xo.  37 

present  conditions,  it  is  impossible  to  find  out.  If  you  make  in- 
quires in  these  days  —  it  has  always  been  so,  in  heated  political 
campaigns,  the  stories  that  you  hear  about  candidates  from  way 
off  counties,  you  charge  that  to  political  gossip  and  political 
malice.     He  is  on  your  ticket,  and  you  vote  for  him. 

You  will  recall  that  all  our  old  writers,  upon  our  form  of 
government,  starting  out  with  De  Toqueville,  then  with  Jefferson, 
even  Bryce,  laid  great  stress  upon  our  town  meetings  where 
people  gathered  together  and  discussed  public  affairs;  that  that 
was  the  back  bone  of  our  form  of  government;  that  it  was  the 
school  of  government  where  they  learned  about  governmental 
principals,  and  the  needs  of  the  country,  and  found  out  incident- 
ally about  each  other. 

The  same  way,  Mr.  Chairman, —  because  you  used  to  go  to 
conventions  in  your  younger  days,  and  so  did  I  —  the  gathering 
together,  not  simply  of  the  delegates  but  of  the  people  who  come 
from  all  parts  of  the  State  was  an  immense  educational  value, 
you  got  to  know  the  people  wTho  took  an  interest  in  politics,  you 
discussed  the  politicians,  and  party  platforms,  you  discussed  the 
public  men,  and  public  men  had  an  opportunity  to  make  them- 
selves known  to  the  people  of  the  State.  With  your  direct  pri- 
maries and  no  conventions,  in  5,  10  or  15  years  from  now  how 
will  a  man  of  ability  in  Albany  or  Cattaraugus  or  St.  Lawrence, 
or  any  of  those  counties,  become  known  to  the  people  of  the  State  ? 
He  may  be  well  and  favorably  known  in  his  own  county,  or  per- 
haps in  two  or  three  surrounding  counties,  but  unless  he  has  been 
sent  to  Congress  or  sent  to  the  Senate  or  some  place  of  that  sort, 
where  he  can  make  a  name,  he  will  not  be  known.  In  the  old 
days  that  was  not  so.  He  made  himself  known  to  the  people  of 
the  State  by  the  part  he  took  in  the  State  conventions. 

But  I  am  going  beyond  the  thing  allotted  to  me  to  talk  about, 
and  I  am  going  to  stop. 

Gentlemen,  I  thank  you. 

The  Chairman. —  Would  some  wish  to  ask  Judge  Herrick  a 
question  ? 

If  not,  Judge,  thank  you  very  much. 

Who  will  you  call  next,  Mr.  Saxe  ? 

Mr.  Saxe. —  Our  fellow  delegate,  Mr.  Wickersham. 


Doc.  No.  ::T  2G 

REMARKS  OF  GEORGE  W.  WICKERSHAM 

Mr.  Wickersiiam. —  Mr.  Chairman,  I  had  not  intended  to 
speak  this  morning  on  the  first  part  of  the  bill  under  consider- 
ation, but  I  should  like  to  make  a  suggestion  in  passing,  and  that 
is  with  respect  to  the  question  of  personal  registration. 

I  have  not  had  the  privilege  of  listening  to  the  discussions  before 
the  committee  on  this  bill  and,  therefore,  I  don't  know  whether 
the  suggestion  has  been  made,  but  there  is  one  perfectly  conclu- 
sive method  of  identification  for  the  purpose  of  determining  the 
right  to  vote,  and  that  is  the  thumb  print.  A  registration  by 
thumb  print  is  so  conclusive  that  the  authorities  who  have  studied 
that  subject  are  of  one  accord  and  testify  that,  curious  as  it  may 
seem,  no  two  thumb  prints  have  ever  been  found  to  bear  the  same 
tracery.  So  that  the  indisputable  and  conclusive  method  of  de- 
terming  the  identity  of  an  individual  is  found  in  the  thumb 
print. 

I  was  present  a  few  days  ago  at  a  dinner  when  the  police  com- 
missioner of  New  York  was  talking  on  that  subject  and  he  said 
that,  a  day  or  two  before  that  occasion,  a  gentleman  had  come 
into  the  department  and  said  that  he  was  going  abroad  on  busi- 
ness, and  that  it  was  essential,  for  certain  business  purposes,  that 
he  should  establish  the  fact  that  he  was  in  the  city  of  New  York 
on  that  particular  day,  and  he  asked  to  leave  his  identification 
thumb  print  in  the  police  department  so  as  to  establish  that  fact 
conclusively  and  beyond  any  controversy,  and  his  thumb  prints 
wore  taken  and  recorded.  The  police  commissioner  said  that  there 
were  no  possible  means  of  disputing  the  fact  that  the  man  who 
made  that  thumb  print  was  at  that  office  on  that  day  and  at  that 
time. 

Now,  that  would  solve  the  problem  with  which  I  confess  I 
have  always  had  sympathy,  i.  e.,  the  voter  whose  occupation 
carries  him  away  from,  home  at  registration  time.  lie  may  be 
a  commercial  traveler,  he  may  be  an  employee  of  the  government 
who  is  not  able  to  come  home  and  register,  or  who  finds  it 
burdensome  to  come  and  register  as  well  as  to  come  and  vote. 
His  identity  could  be  established  beyond  any  peradventure  for 
purposes  of  registration  by  sending  a  registration  card  duly  signed 
and  identified   with   bis  thumb  print. 


27  Doc.  TsTo.  37 

But,  Mr.  Chairman,  I  did  not  come  here  to  speak  particularly 
on  that  phase  of  the  problem  before  you. 

Mr.  Saxe's  bill  proposes  to  re-establish  as  a  constitutional  right 
the  power  of  the  people  to  assemble  in  convention  to  nominate 
those  for  whom  they  wish  to  vote  at  general  elections. 

It  is  curious  that  in  the  effort  to  prevent  abuses  of  the  rights 
of  the  people  they  sometimes  resort  to  a  remedy  which  means 
the  destruction  of  their  fundamental  rights.  For  ages  the  tra- 
ditional method  which  English  speaking  people  have  adopted  in 
solving  their  problems  of  government  has  been  to  meet  in  assembly 
of  one  kind  or  another  to  debate  the  questions  before  them,  and 
to  come  to  conclusions  as  a  result  of  those  discussions.  Previous 
speakers  have  spoken  to  you  of  the  educational  effect  of  that  sys- 
tem of  government,  of  the  development  of  national  character,  of 
national  characteristics  which  have  been  the  outcome  of  this  tra- 
ditional method  of  meeting  in  assembly  and  debating,  discussing, 
and  agreeing. 

It  is  true  that  that  system  was  abused.  There  is  no  system 
conceivable,  there  is  no  plan  of  government  that  has  ever  been 
framed  that  is  not  susceptible  of  abuse.  Benjamin  Franklin 
long  ago  said  that  government,  like  clocks,  go  by  the  motion 
that  men  give  to  them.  And  you  can  never  establish  a  scheme  of 
government  which  will  work  automatically  and  which  will  not  be 
susceptible  of  abuse.  But  of  all  the  extraordinary  methods  of 
government  adopted  by  a  free  people  to  remedy  an  abuse,  I  under- 
take to  say  none  more  extraordinary  was  ever  adopted  than  to 
put  into  the  statute  law  of  the  State  a  provision  that  any  body 
of  men  constituting  a  political  party  or  a  group  might  not  meet 
together  and  agree  upon  the  name  of  persons  for  whom  they 
propose  to  vote  at  any  ensuing  election.  jSTo  more  preposterous 
idea  'ever  found  expression  on  the  statute  books  of  a.  State. 

Of,  course,  it  is  true  that  the  power  of  the  convention  was  at 
times  abused.  We  are  familiar  with  the  story  of  the  inner  group 
that  assembled  at  one  of  the  great  political  conventions,  and  when 
the  "  slate  "  was  handed  out  there  was  one  blank  left,  the  ques- 
tion was  asked  who  was  to  fill  that  place  and  the  answer  of  the 
boss  was:  "Well,  we  will  leave  that  to  the  convention."  But 
whose  fault  was  it?     It  was  all  in  the  hands  of  that  convention. 


Doc.  No.  37  2S 

All  that  was  necessary  was  that  a  majority  of  that  convention 
should  have  lost  confidence  in  the  directing  committee,  and  its 
power  was  gone.  And  every  member  of  that  committee  had  the 
right  to  rise  in  his  place  and  express  his  opinions;  every 
member  of  that  convention.  And  sometimes  on  notable  occasions 
slates  were  broken  and  conventions  nominated  their  own  men, 
and  if  they  did  not,  it  was  because  the  committee  represented  the 
views  of  the  conventions,  and  the  members  acquiesced  in  the 
direction  of  the  Committee  or  Leaders. 

We  have  embodied  in  our  fundamental  law  of  this  State  the 
right,  which  the  Legislature  may  not  invade,  of  the  people  to 
freely  meet  and  petition  the  government,  or  any  branch  of  it, 
for  redress  and  grievances.  Shall  we  not  embody  in  it  the  right 
of  the  people  to  meet  and  agree  upon  those  for  whom  they  will 
vote  to  fill  the  offices  of  the  State  at  any  ensuing  election  (  I 
would  not  go  as  far  as  Mr.  Saxe  does  in  this  bill,  in  limiting  the 
nominations  to  party  convention,  because  I  think  that  errs  on  that 
side  just  the  same  as  the  present  law  does  on  the  side  to  which 
I  object.  If  any  respectable  number  of  citizens  desire  to  pat  in 
nomination  by  petition  — 

Me.  Saxe. — That  is  not  this  amendment.  This  is  only  as  to 
party  nominations. 

Me.  Wickeesiiam. — That  is  one  thing. 

Me.  J.  G.  Saxe. —  This  does  not  prevent  independent  nomina- 
tions. 

Me.  Wickeesiiam. — Then  I  withdraw  my  comment  on  it,  be- 
cause I  am  speaking  of  the  right  which  is  the  traditional  right  in- 
herited by  us  from  our  forefathers,  which  should  be  jealously  pre- 
served, to  meet  in  convention,  have  our  delegates  chosen  by  an 
appropriate  method  which  safeguards  the  right  of  the  voter  within 
the  party  to  choose  the  delegate  to  assemble  in  convention,  to 
nominate  the  persons  for  whom  they  desire  to  vote  at  an  ensuing 
election. 

Me.  J.  G.  Saxe. — I  agree  with  you  absolutely  on  that  proposi- 
tion. My  bill  would  be  unconscionable  if  it  prevented  independent 
nominations. 

Me.  Wiokersiiam. — Then  we  agree  upon  that.  There  is  no 
reason  \  think  of  why  that  traditional  method  should  he  impaired. 


29  Doc.  No.   37 

It  has  been  impaired  by  the  Legislature  of  this  State  in  response 
to  a  momentary  sentiment,  I  believe  a  very  mistaken  sentiment, 
a  sentiment  founded  upon  abuse.  But  I  think  no  more  important 
work  can  be  done  by  this  Convention  than  to  restore  the  ancient 
privileges  of  the  free  people  of  the  State  of  New  York,  by  re- 
moving the  obstruction  to  their  acting  in  that  traditional  method 
in  selecting  those  for  whom  they  propose  to  vote. 

The  Chairman. — Would  any  of  the  gentlemen  desire  to  ask 
any  questions  of  Mr.  Wickersham? 

Mr.  Owen. — Would  you  extend  that  further  than  is  extended 
by  Mr.  Saxe's  bill,  to  assembly  districts? 

Mr.  Wickersham. — I  see  no  reason  why  people  of  assembly 
districts  should  not  have  the  same  right  as  the  people  of  the 
State  at  large  have.  I  think  the  conventions  of  the  Assembly 
districts  have  served  a  most  useful  purpose.  I  agree  with  Judge 
Herrick.  I  can  go  back  in  my  recollection  to  the  time  when  I 
served,  as  a  very  young  man,  as  delegate  to  assembly  district  con- 
ventions. It  is  especially  valuable  in  the  cities.  In  a  great  city 
like  New  York,  where  as  Mr.  Guthrie  says,  we  do  not  know  our 
neighbors,  I  found  a  great  helpfulness  in  going  to  the  city  con- 
vention where  I  met  my  neighbor,  who  lived  around  the  corner 
of  the  block;  I  had  only  known  him  previously  by  the  sign  on 
his  door,  but  he  seemed  to  be  an  intelligent  man  when  I  came  to 
meet  him  and  I  hoped  that  he  felt  that  he  gained  something  in 
knowing  me  as  I  knew  I  gained  something  from  knowing  him. 
And  I  think  those  associations  of  the  delegates  in  the  different 
conventions  constitute  a  most  useful  aid  in  obliterating  the  sharp 
animosities  of  caste  which  grow  up  in  our  complex  civilization, 
and  tending  to  make  people  of  all  classes  unite  in  a  common  in- 
terest in  the  good  government  of  their  community. 

For  that  reason,  among  others,  I  am  in  favor  of  having  the 
convention  system  in  the  small  subdivisions  as  well  as  in  the 
large  ones. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  38 


REPORT  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  INDUSTRIAL 
INTERESTS  AND  RELATIONS,  RELATIVE  TO  THE 
SEVERAL  PROPOSED  AMENDMENTS 


August  9,  1915 
Mr.  Parsons,  from  the  Committee  on  Industrial  Interests  and 
Relations,  to  which  were  referred  the  following  Proposed  Amend- 
ments, providing  for  the  inclusion  of  occupational  diseases  as  a  sub- 
ject for  workmen's  compensation:  No.  23,  introduced  by  Mr. 
Aiken;  No.  383,  Int.  No.  376,  introduced  by  Mr.  Foley,  and  No. 
569,  Int.  No.  554,  introduced  by  Mr.  Eisner,  reported  by  Proposed 
Amendment  entitled  "  Proposed  constitutional  amendment  to 
amend  Sections  18  and  19  of  Article  I  of  the  Constitution,  in  re- 
gard to  damages  for  injuries  causing  death,  laws  for  the  protection 
of  the  lives,  health  or  safety  of  employees,  and  workmen's  com- 
pensation for  injuries  or  death,  from  accidents  or  occupational 
diseases"  (Int.  No.  714),  which  was  read  twice  and  said  com- 
mittee reported  in  favor  of  the  passage  of  the  same,  which  report 
was  agreed  to  and  said  Proposed  Amendment  ordered  printed  and 
referred  to  the  Committee  of  the  Whole. 

The  Proposed  Amendment  adds  occupational  diseases  to  acci- 
dents as  a  subject  of  compensation  to  workmen  and  is  in  some 


Doc.  No.  38  2 

respects  an  amendment  as  to  form  of  the  present  workmen's  com- 
pensation provision. 

Although  it  may  be  that  illness  from  an  occupational  disease  is 
a  subject  for  compensation  under  the  present  constitutional  pro- 
vision for  workmen's  compensation,  that  is  not  certain.  This  will 
make  it  certain. 

The  theory  of  workmen's  compensation  is  that  injuries  happen 
in  industry,  and  that  it  is  better  for  the  employers  and  the  em- 
ployes, for  the  industry  and  for  the  public,  that  "  a  more  just  and 
economical  system  of  providing'  compensation  -  -  *  to  em- 
ployes "  should  be  substituted  '"  for  wasteful  and  protracted  dam- 
age suits,  usually  unjust  in  their  results  either  to  the  employer  or 
the  employee,  and  sometimes  to  both."  (Opinion  of  Judge  Miller 
writing  for  the  Court  of  Appeals,  in  Matter  of  Jensen,  Document 
No.  19.) 

Occupational  diseases  are  as  likely  to  happen  in  some  lines  of 
work  as  accidents  in  others.  The  same  arguments  apply  for  com- 
pensation for  occupational  diseases  as  apply  for  compensation  for 
injuries  for  accidents. 

Occupational  diseases  may  be  due  either  to  the  substances  with 
which  workmen  have  to  do,  or  to  the  conditions  under  which  they 
must  do  their  work. 

The  substances  which  are  injurious  to  workmen  are  the  metals, 
particularly  lead,  certain  acids  and  soots. 

Of  the  conditions  of  work  which  lead  to  disease,  the  best  known 
is  the  so-called  "  bends  ",  the  disease  of  the  sand-hog  or  caisson- 
worker. 

It  would  be  for  the  Legislature  to  enumerate  the  diseases  for 
which  compensation  would  be  given. 

Your  committee  submits  that  it  is  better  draftsmanship  to 
amend  Section  18  in  the  manner  now  proposed  than  in  the  manner 
in  which  it  is  now  done  in  Section  L9,  whore  it  is  supposed  that 
Section  18  is  amended  by  the  provisions  that  the  right  to  com- 
pensation under  a  workmen's  compensation  law  is  exclusive  of 
other  rights  or  remedies  and  that  the  law  may  provide  that  the 
amount  of  such  compensation  for  (loath  shall  not  exceed  a  fixed 

or  determinable  sum. 

HERBERT  PARSONS, 

<  'hairman. 


3  Doc.  No.  38 

Mr.  Parsons,  from  the  Committee  on  Industrial  Interests  and 
Relations,  to  which  was  referred  Proposed  Amendment  intro- 
duced by  Mr.  Franchot  (Printed  No.  7QQ,  Int.  No.  131),  entitled 
"  Proposed  constitutional  amendment  to  amend  Article  V  of  the 
Constitution,  by  striking  therefrom  the  provisions  of  Section  8  of 
said  article,  prohibiting  the  creation  of  offices  for  the  weighing, 
gauging,  measuring,  culling  or  inspecting  any  merchandise,  prod- 
uce, manufacture  or  commodity  whatever,"  reported  as  follows : 

The  Committee  on  Industrial  Interests  and  Relations  recom- 
mends the  passage  of  the  said  Proposed  Constitutional  Amend- 
ment, with  the  following  amendments : 

In  the  title  in  line  one,  after  the  word  "  amend  "  and  before  the 
word  "  article "  insert  "  section  eight," ;  and  after  the  comma, 
following  the  word  "  constitution  ",  strike  out  the  residue  of  the 
title,  and  insert  in  place  thereof  the  following :  "  in  order  to  permit 
the  non-compulsory  inspection  and  grading  of  food  products." 

Page  one,  line  seven,  place  brackets  about  the  word  "  created  ". 
which  report  was  agreed  to,  and  said  Proposed  Amendment  ordered 
reprinted  as  amended  and  referred  to  the  Committee  of  the  Whole. 

This  section  was  inserted  by  the  Constitutional  Convention  of 
1846.  Prior  to  that  time  there  had  been  legislation  which  pro- 
hibited the  export  of  certain  articles  unless  they  were  first  in- 
spected. There  was  a  fee  for  each  inspection.  The  legislation 
was  designed  to  give  to  products  of  New  York  State  an  advantage 
over  products  from  other  States  through  the  supposed  superiority 
of  those  from  New  York  State.  An  army  of  officers  grew  up  under 
it,  and  it  became  a  most  offensive  provision.  It  was  repealed  by 
statute,  and  so  strong  was  the  feeling  that  this  clause  was  inserted 
in  the  Constitution.  It,  of  course,  was  intended  to  prevent  officers 
for  the  compulsory  weighing,  gauging,  measuring,  culling  or  in- 
specting of  merchandise,  etc.  The  word  "  compulsory,"  however, 
was  not  inserted. 

It  is  the  opinion  of  the  Attorney-General's  office  that  the  pres- 
ence of  the  section  in  its  present  form  might  tend  to  defeat  desir- 
able legislation  in  order  to  protect  producers  and  consumers  of 
various  food  products.  If,  for  instance  in  the  large  centers  to 
which  products  are  sent,  it  is  desirable  to  establish  a  public  market, 
in  order  to  deal  with  the  cost  of  living,  to  eliminate  some  of  the 


Doc.  'No.  38  4 

middlemen,  and  for  that  purpose,  to  have  goods  brought  to  that 
market,  classified  according  to  standards  which  the  market  may 
establish  for  the  convenience  of  both  sellers  and  producers  alike,  it 
is  doubtful  whether,  under  this  provision,  the  State  could  pay  any 
officers  who  were  selected  to  do  such  inspecting  and  standardizing. 
Under  such  an  arrangement,  it  would  not  be  compulsory  upon 
anyone  to  submit  their  products  to  inspection,  but  unless  they  did 
so,  they  could  not  sell  them  at  the  market.  We  could  not,  for 
instance,  under  this  section  as  it  now  reads,  adopt  the  system 
which  prevails  in  Illinois,  where  there  are  State  officials  with  some 
such  powers  as  these,  and  where  the  Chicago  Board  of  Trade 
allows  nothing  to  be  sold  upon  it  except  under  the  standards  and 
classifications  determined  by  the  State  officials  mentioned.  Under 
the  Illinois  system,  the  situation  there  is  said  to  be  far  better 
than  the  situation  which,  under  the  present  provision  of  the  Con- 
stitution, is  possible  here.  This  will  merely  make  possible  that 
system  and  will  continue  the  constitutional  provision  with  respect 
to  food  products  in  the  form  in  which  it  was  really  intended  to  be, 
as  adopted  in  1846,  where  it  was  aimed  to  eliminate  compuJson 
inspection,  etc. 

At  a  time  when  the  problem  of  reducing  the  high  cost  of  living 
is  so  acute  over  the  entire  country,  it  is  in  the  last  degree  advis- 
able, in  the  judgment  of  this  committee,  that  the  Legislature 
should  be  left  free  to  meet  that  problem  in  such  manner  as  it  si  es 
fit  after  a  full  and  complete  investigation  of  conditions.  It  is 
apparent  from  the  hearings  had  before  this  committee  that  one  of 
the  most  likely  remediable  measures  to  be  adopted  will  be  the 
establishment  of  local  municipal  markets  under  governmental 
control,  and  it  was  clearly  demonstrated  that  no  such  market  could 
be  useful  without  the  ability  to  fix  grades  and  qualities  of  food 
products  dealt  in  thereon.  Section  8  of  Article  V  of  the  Consti- 
tution in  its  present  form  stands  directly  in  the  way  of  any  pro- 
vision for  this  useful  function. 

HERBERT  PARSONS, 

( 'hair man. 

Mr.  Parsons,  from  the  Committee  on  Industrial  [interests  and 
Relations,  to  which  was  referred  Proposed  Amendment  introduced 


5  Doc.  No.  38 

by  Mr.  A.  E.  Smith  (No.  194,  Int.  No.  193),  entitled  "  Proposed 
constitutional  amendment  to  amend  article  3  of  the  Constitution 
in  relation  to  minimum  wages/'  reported  in  favor  of  the  passage  of 
the  same,  with  the  following  amendments : 

!  n  the  title,  strike  out  the  word  "  minimum  "  and  insert  in  lieu 
thereof  the  word  "  living  ",  and  after  the  word  "  wages  ",  insert 
the  words  "  to  be  paid  to  women  and  children  ". 

In  line  5,  strike  out  the  words  "  minimum  or  ". 

In  line  G,  strike  out  the  word  "  or  ",  and  insert  in  lieu  thereof 
the  word  "  and  ". 

which  report  was  agreed  to,  and  said  Proposed  Amendment  ordered 
reprinted  as  amended  and  referred  to  the  Committee  of  the  Whole. 

The  number  of  poor  persons  in  this  State  who  are  dependent 
upon  public  charity  is  markedly  on  the  increase.  In  the  year 
ending  September  30,  1913,  the  number  of  persons  supported  in 
county,  city  and  town  almshouse  institutions,  or  receiving  tem- 
porary relief  in  the  several  counties  of  the  State,  was  403,991,  and 
the  expense  therefor  was  $8,401,318.43.  This  enormous  expense 
was  incurred  in  pursuance  of  our  historic  policy  of  having  the 
State  responsible  for  the  poor,  a  policy  which  is  now  set  forth  in 
the  language  of  Section  2  of  the  Poor  Law,  that  "  a  '  poor  person  * 
is  one  unable  to  maintain  himself,  and  such  person  shall  be  main- 
tained by  the  town,  city,  county  or  State  *  *  *."  The  number 
of  such  persons  who  were  objects  of  such  public  charity  had  in- 
creased 24  per  cent,  in  number  in  the  three  years  from  1910  to 
1913,  and  the  expense  had  increased  37  per  cent.  In  the  twenty 
years  from  1890  to  1910,  the  number  increased  from  175,341  to 
325,653,  an  increase  of  85  per  cent,  and  the  expense  increased 
from  $3,319,865.25  to  $6,096,958.95,  an  increase  of  83  per  cent, 
although  the  population  of  the  State  in  the  same  period  increased 
only  52  per  cent.  Legislation  which  will  require  that  living  wages 
be  paid  in  industry  is  one  method  of  checking  and  reversing  this 
increase  in  number  and  expense. 

To  what  extent  in  this  State  do  employees  receive  less  than  a 
living  wage,  by  which  is  meant  a  wage  sufficient  to  supply  the 
necessary  cost  of  healthy  living  ?  We  do  not  know.  We  do  know, 
however,  that  there  are  many  thousands.     The  State  Factory  In- 


Doc.  No.   38  6 

vestigating  Commission,  which  was  authorized  by  the  Legislature 
after  the  Triangle  Shirtwaist  Factory  fire  in  New  York  city, 
studied  the  cost  of  living,  and  also  gathered  the  wage  schedules  of 
105,000  employees  in  certain  trades.  The  conclusion  reached 
by  its  investigators  was  that  a  living  wage  in  New  York  city  for  a 
woman  living  independently  should  be  $9  a  week.  Out  of  45,000 
department  store  employees  receiving  $50  a  week  or  less,  there 
were  13,000  women  eighteen  years  of  age  or  over  who  earned  less 
than  $9  a  week.  Fifty-three  per  cent,  of  all  female  employees  of 
eighteen  years  of  age  or  over  in  stock  and  sales  received  less  than 
$9.  Four  thousand  women  of  eighteen  years  and  over  employed 
in  industrial  lines  were  getting  less  than  $8  a  week,  and  averaged 
$5.79  a  week.  In  half  of  the  wage-earners'  families  that  were 
investigated  there  was  no  male  wage-earner.  One-half  of  the 
people  discovered  in  the  investigation  received  less  than  enough 
to  live  properly  and  independently. 

The  following  is  a  budget  of  the  average  expenditures  for  a  girl 
who  received  $8  a  week: 

Average  for  clothes $1   50 

Room  rent 2  00 

7  breakfasts  and  7  dinners 2  00 

6  lunches 90 

Carfares  for  6  days GO 

Allowance  for  insurance  and  medical  care 25 

Dues,  reading  and  amusement 50 

Savings 25 

$8  00 

Department  store  women  are  required  to  be  neat  in  their  ap- 
pearance, so  that  the  item  of  clothes  is  an  important  one.  It  will 
be  noticed  that  the  lunches  average  15  cents  each,  and  that  if  each 
breakfast  averages  10  cents,  each,  there  is  not  quite  20  cents  for 
each  dinner. 

Insufficient  wages  mean  that  food  is  cut  down  below  the  level 
of  healthy  subsistence.  This  is  illustrated  by  studies  of  family 
budgets.  In  a  study  of  200  families  made  some  years  ago  in  the 
Old  Greenwich  village  section  of  New  York  city,  it  was  found 
that  in  most  families  about  a  dollar  a  week  for  each  person  in  the 
family  not  an  infant  was  spent  for  food,  except  in  the  very  poor 


7  Doc.   No.  38 

or  more  prosperous  families,  that  in  the  week  in  which  the  rent 
was  paid,  the  allowance  for  food  was  frequently  cut  down,  and  that 
if  a  new  pair  of  shoes  or  a  new  coat  was  necessary  for  one  of  the 
children,  the  food  was  apt  to  suffer.  The  23  families  whose  in- 
comes were  less  than  $600  a  year  and  who  were  independent  of 
organized  charity  "  were  underfed,  poorly  clad  and  usually 
wretchedly  housed.''  Most  families  lived  from  week  to  week.  One 
hundred  and  fifty-three  out  of  the  200  families  had  a  deficit  or 
just  came  out  even  at  the  end  of  the  year.  A  family  of  this  char- 
acter is  therefore  "  constantly  on  the  verge  of  dependence  —  if 
not  on  the 'charity  society  —  then  on  their  relatives  and  friends, 
in  case  of  any  long  uneniploynient  or  industrial  depression." 

Insufficient  food  means  a  weakened  body,  a  less  efficient  worker 
and  a  greater  predisposition  to  illness.  Workers  receiving  such 
small  wages  have  nothing  to  spend  by  way  of  preventing  illness, 
and  when  it  comes,  nothing  to  spend  to  cure  it.  Less  than  living 
wages  are  therefore  breeders  of  illness  and  dependency. 

It  cannot  be  definitely  "said  that  low  wages  lead  to  immorality. 
It  is  obvious,  however,  and  investigation  has  confirmed  it,  that  the 
temptations  are  less  easily  resisted  when  wages  are  insufficient. 

The  Factory  Investigating  Commission's  investigation  also 
showed  that  to  raise  5,000  women  in  the  large  department  stores 
who  were  receiving  less  than  $9  a  week  to  the  $9  standard  would 
mean  an  addition  of  only  one-third  of  1  per  cent,  in  the  selling 
price,  and  that  to  raise  the  mature  women  in  the  neighborhood 
stores  to  a  wage  of  $9  a  week  and  girls  under  eighteen  to  a  wage 
of  $6  a  week,  would  only  necessitate  pricing  articles  at  a  full  dollar 
instead  of  99  cents. 

Wages  vary  greatly.  One  department  store  paid  86  per  cent, 
of  its  saleswomen  $10  or  more,  and  another  paid  86  per  cent,  less 
than  $10.     There  is  a  lack  of  standard  of  women's  wages. 

In  principle,  the  living  wage  is  not  new.  We  apply  it  in 
government.  Neither  the  Nation,  the  State  nor  any  subdivision  of 
the  State  offers  employment  to  persons  at  the  lowest  wages  they 
will  take, —  at  wages  insufficient  for  healthy  subsistence.  On  the 
contrary,  they  fix  wages  which  they  believe  will  be  fair.  It  would 
seem  a  stupid  as  well  as  inhumane  policy  for  the  State  to  employ 


Doc.  No.   38  8 

labor  at  less  than  living  wages,  as  it  would  mean  that  the  laborers 
were  likely  later  to  become  dependent  upon  the  State.  The  living 
wage  is  applied  by  many  of  our  largest  corporations.  They  do 
not  seek  to  obtain  labor  at  the  lowest  wages  possible.  They  fix  a 
not  less  than  living  wage  for  all  employees.  The  more  enlightened 
employers  find  that  higher  wages  mean  greater  production.  One 
effect  of  the  policy  of  allowing  only  living  wages  to  be  paid  would 
be  to  compel  the  employer  in  his  competition  to  strive  to  get  the 
more  efficient  help  and  to  employ  only  that  which  is  efficient. 

We  have  sought  in  the  interest  of  the  general  welfare  to  pro- 
tect employees  by  requiring  that  their  work  be  carried  on  under 
sanitary  conditions  and  that  machinery  be  so  guarded  as  to  pre- 
vent accidents.  We  have  prevented  all  competition  among  em- 
ployers along  lines  not  up  to  such  standards.  The  living  wage 
is  designed  to  aid  the  general  welfare  by  requiring  that  workers 
shall  receive  wages  sufficient  for  healthy  subsistence  and  to  exclude 
from  the  realm  of  competition  between  employers,  competition 
for  labor  at  a  less  cost  than  what  is  a  living  wage  to  labor. 

How  does  it  serve  the  general  welfare  that  people  should  be 
employed  at  less  than  living  wages  ?  What  is  to  be  gained  by 
allowing  competition  for  labor  to  be  paid  less  than  a  living  wage  ? 
If  it  is  against  public  policy,  as  we  declare  that  it  is,  to  allow  an  em- 
ployer to  engage  a  woman  to  work  excessive  hours  or  under  insani- 
tary conditions,  is  it  not  equally  against  public  policy  to  permit 
him  to  engage  her  for  wages  insufficient  to  provide  the  food  and 
shelter  without  which  she  cannot  continue  in  health  ?  From  the 
point  of  view  of  the  employer  one  way  of  increasing  his  expenses 
is  the  same  as  another,  while  to  those  concerned  with  the  public 
welfare,  the  permanent  efficiency  of  industry,  and  the  maintenance 
of  national  health,  adequate  food  is  at  least  as  important  as  reason- 
able hours  or  sanitary  conditions  of  employment. 

Most  employers  desire  to  pay  a  living  wage.  No  living  wage 
legislation  would  be  necessary  to  bring  the  small  employer  to  pay 
living  wages  to  the  few  people  whom  he  employs  and  therefore 
well  knows.  His  human  interest  in  them  assures  them  of  living 
wages.  In  large  industries,  however,  the  employer  knows  little 
about  his  employees.    His  relation  is  not  human ;  it  is  impersonal. 


9  Due.  So.  38 

When  it  is  brought  to  his  attention  that  he  is  not  paying  a  living 
wage,  in  most  cases  he  proceeds  to  pay  it.  Many  employers  have 
welcomed  the  suggestions  of  the  Factory  Investigating  Commission 
in  this  respect.  There  are,  however,  some  employers  who  will  pay 
the  lowest  wages  they  can.  They  must  be  dealt  with  by  law,  just 
as  in  connection  with  sanitary  and  accident-preventing  regulations 
in  factories,  they  have  had  to  be  dealt  with  by  law. 

The  minimum  wage  is  an  Anglo-Saxon  development.  It  started 
in  New  Zealand  in  1894,  and  then  was  taken  up  by  the  various 
states  of  the  Australian  Commonwealth.  In  1909  it  was  enacted 
in  Great  Britain,  first  being  applied  to  only  the  ready-made  and 
wholesale  tailoring,  cardboard-box  making,  chain  making,  and  lace 
finishing  trades.  In  America  it  has,  in  very  recent  years,  been 
enacted  in  California,  Colorado,  Massachusetts,  Minnesota,  Ne- 
braska, Oregon,  Utah,  Washington  and  Wisconsin.  Except  in 
Utah,  where  the  statute  fixes  the  amount  of  the  wages,  the  legisla- 
tion usually  provides  that  a  commission  or  board,  such  as  the 
Industrial  Commission  which  now  exists  by  statute  in  this  State, 
shall  ascertain,  sometimes  with  the  assistance  of  an  advisory 
board  made  up  of  employers  and  employees  in  the  industry,  the 
minimum  wages  needed  to  supply  the  necessary  cost  of  proper  liv- 
ing, and  establishes  them  as  the  minimum  wages  to  be  paid, 
making  it  a  violation  of  law  for  an  employer  to  pay  less  than  such 
wages.  In  all  except  Wisconsin  such  legislation  is  only  for  women 
and  children.  There  is  generally  a  provision  in  the  law  that  a 
license  may  be  issued  to  a  woman  physically  defective  by  age  or 
otherwise,  and  authorizing  her  employment  for  a  special  minimum 
wage  less  than  the  regular  minimum  wage. 

In  the  application  of  minimum  or  living  wage  legislation,  it  is 
recognized  that  the  cost  of  living  varies  according  to  localities. 
It  is  also  recognized  that  many  people  who  enter  industry  are  at 
first  only  apprentices,  and  that  they  are  not  to  be  treated  as 
ordinary  employees. 

One  of  the  arguments  made  against  living  wage  legislation  is 
that  it  drives  people  out  of  employment.  If  such  legislation  has 
the  effect  on  industry  of  confining  those  employed  in  it  to  those 
who  are  efficient,  it  has,  in  that  respect  also  rendered  a  service. 


Doc.  aSTo.  38  10 

Experience  has  shown,  however,  that  the  number  who  are  driven 
out  of  employment  is  small.  Sometimes  they  are  cared  for  by  the 
system  of  special  licenses  mentioned  above.  They  are,  moreover, 
the  inefficient,  and  are  those  most  likely  to  become  dependents 
of  the  State.  From  the  point  of  view  of  the  taxpayer,  it  is  cheaper 
that  these  few  inefficient  be  driven  out  of  employment,  if  the  many 
others  who,  because  of  insufficient  wages  would  be  in  danger  of  be- 
coming dependents,  are  through  the  payment  to  them  of  living 
wages  prevented  from  becoming  dependents. 

The  machinery  necessary  to  carry  out  living  wage  legislation 
places  some  burden  upon  industry  in  that  it  will  take  some  of  its 
time  and  attention.  We  are  told  that  the  living  wage  plan  "  inter- 
feres with  business,  and  business  is  having  a  hard  time."  But 
that  is  no  argument  against  the  principle.  It  may  appeal  to  our 
sympathies,  but  it  should  not  be  allowed  to  prevail.  It  is  a 
century  old  as  an  argument,  and  if  admitted  to  be  conclusive,  none 
of  the  beneficent  labor  legislation  that  has  been  enacted  during  the 
past  century  would  ever  have  been  enacted.  The  burden  placed 
upon  our  public  service  corporations  by  rate  legislation  is  consider- 
able, as  is  the  burden  placed  upon  manufacture  through  the 
requirements  of  our  labor  laws  in  regard  to  sanitary  conditions 
and  protection  against  machinery.  But  in  each  case  the  good  has 
far  outweighed  the  burden. 

If  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  shall  hold  that  the 
minimum  wage  law  of  Oregon,  the  constitutionality  of  which  has 
been  argued  before  it,  is  not  in  violation  of  the  provisions  of  the 
Federal  Constitution,  it  may  be  that  without  this  direct  provision 
our  own  Court  of  Appeals  would  hold  that  such  legislation  is 
within  the  police  power  and  not  in  violation  of  similar  provisions 
of  the  State  constitution,  and  there  is  encouragement  for  this  view 
in  the  language  used  by  Judge  Miller  in  his  recent  opinion  in  the 
Jensen  case.  The  Court  of  Appeals  in  the  [ves  case,  however, 
flatly  disagreed  with  the  then  recent  definition  of  the  police  power 
given  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  and  for  that 
reason  the  Constitution  should  give  to  the  Legislature  the  power 
In  enact  minimum  wage  legislation. 

HERBERT  PABSOXS, 

( 'hairman. 


11  L)o<  .    No.  38 

Mr.  Parsons,  from  the  Committee  on  Industrial  Interests  and 
Eelations,  to  which  was  referred  Proposed  Amendment  introduced 
by  Mr.  Parsons  (No.  417,  Int.  Xo.  405),  entitled  "  Proposed  con- 
stitutional amendment  to  amend  Section  19  of  Article  I  of  the 
Constitution,  in  relation  to  legislation  affecting  employees,"'  re- 
ported as  follows : 

The  Committee  on  Industrial  Interests  and  Relations  recom- 
mends the  passage  of  the  same  without  amendment, 
which  report  was  agreed  to  and  said  proposed  amendment  referred 
to  the  Committee  of  the  Whole. 

While  the  recent  opinion  of  the  Court  of  Appeals  in  the  Matter 
of  Jensen,  Document  Xo.  19,  in  which  the  present  Workmen's 
Compensation  Law  is  held  not  to  be  in  violation  of  the  Federal 
Constitution,  may  be  considered  to  indicate  that  it  is  the  intention 
of  that  court,  in  interpreting  the  police  power  and  in  construing 
due  process  clauses,  to  follow  the  lead  of  the  Supreme  Court  of 
the  United  States,  it  is  eminently  desirable  that  this  uniformity 
of  decision  should  be  made  certain.  This  object  is  accomplished 
by  the  amendment.  The  legislation  to  which  it  refers  would  have 
to  pass  the  test  only  of  one  due  process  clause,  namely,  that  of 
the  Federal  Constitution,  instead  of  two,  which  though  identical 
in  language  have  been  construed  differently  by  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States  and  our  own  Court  of  Appeal:.  In  the  case 
of  Ives  v.  South  Buffalo  II.  R.  Co.,  201  X.  Y.  271,  in  which  the 
former  Workmen's  Compensation  Law  was  declared  unconstitu- 
tional as  in  violation  of  Section  6  of  Article  I  of  the  State  Con- 
stitution, our  Court  of  Appeals  indicated  that  it  differed  in  its 
construction  of  the  due  process  language  in  the  State  Constitution 
and  of  its  converse,  the  extent  of  the  police  power,  from  that  of 
the  Supreme  Court  of  the  united  States  in  the  ease  of  Noble 
Slate  Ban!-  v.  Haskell,  219  U.  S.  104. 

An  attempt  to  lead  to  uniformity  of  constitutional  decision 
was  made  by  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  in  the  passage  of 
the  act  of  March  3,  1911,  which  amended  section  237  of 
the  Federal  Judiciary  Act  so  as  to  provide  that  the  Supreme 
Court  might  review  a  decision  of  a  state  court  which  had  held 
that  a  state  statute  was  in  violation  of  the  Constitution  of  the 


Doc  No.  38  12 

United  States.  But  unless  this  amendment  is  adopted  the  result 
of  this  extended  right  of  appeal  may  be  to  make,  more  glaring 
the  difference  of  construction  given  by  the  two  courts.  Let  us 
suppose,  for  instance,  that  the  Ives  case  had  come  after  this  right 
of  appeal  had  been  granted  and  had  been  taken  to  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States,  and  that  that  Court  had  declared  that 
it  was  not  in  violation  of  the  due  process  clause  of  the  Fourteenth 
Amendment  of  the  Federal  Constitution,  although  the  Court  of 
Appeals  of  this  state  had  declared  that  it  was  in  violation  of  the 
due  process  clause,  identical  in  language,  of  the  State  Constitu- 
tion. We  would  then  be  in  the  anomalous  position  of  having  a 
law  of  great  interest  and  moment  held  constitutional  by  the  great- 
est court  in  the  country  but  held  unconstitutional  by  the  greatest 
court  in  the  state,  in  construing  identical  constitutional  language. 
The  State  Court's  opinion  being  supreme  as  to  the  State  Consti- 
tution, the  statute  would  thereby  be  made  inoperative.  Such  a 
situation  is  to  be  avoided  so  far  as  this  legislation  is  concerned, 
it  would  place  New  York  in  the  same  position  as  New  Jersey 
and  Wisconsin,  neither  of  which  has  a  due  process  clause  in  its 
State  Constitution. 

HERBERT  PARSON'S, 

(  'hairman. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

Mo,  39 


MINORITY  REPORT  ON   PROPOSED  CONSTITUTIONAL 

AMENDMENT  No.  417  (Int.  No.  405) 


August  9,  1915 

Mr.  Leggett  presented  the  following  minority  report  on  u  Pro- 
posed constitutional  amendment  to  amend  Section  19  of  Article 
I  of  the  Constitution,  in  relation  to  legislation  affecting  em- 
;  I       bs."     (No.  417,  Int.  ^o.  405.) 

The  minority  of4  the  committee  opposes  the  approval  of  this 
proposal  for  the  following  reasons : 

That  it  would  make  the  Constitution  of  New  York  unique 
among  American  Constitutions,  because  in  effect  it  would  contain 
no  restriction  whatever  on  the  power  of  the  Legislature. 

The  constitutionality  of  no  enactment  could  he  questioned  in 
the  courts  unless  the  Legislature  forgot  to  declare  that  it  was 
"  necessary  for  the  protection  of  the  lives,  health,  safety,  morals  or 
welfare  of  emplovees." 

J.  C.  LECxGETT. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN   CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  40 


REPORT  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  GOVERNOR  AND 
OTHER  STATE  OFFICERS,  RELATIVE  TO  THE  SEVERAL 
PROPOSED  AMENDMENTS 


August  11,  1915 

Mr.  Tanner  from  the  committee  on  Governor  and  Other  State 
Officers  to  which  was  referred  proposed  amendments  as  follows: 
Int.  No.  85,  Pr.  No.  85,  by  Mr.  E.  N.  Smith;  Int.  No.  110,  Pr. 
No.  110,  by  Mr.  Brookes;  Int.  No.  Ill,  Pr.  No.  Ill,  by  Mr.  E. 
B.  Smith;  Int.  No.  125,  Pr.  No.  125,  by  Mr.  C.  Nicoll;  Int.  No. 
172,  Pr.  No.  172,  by  Mr.  Bernstein ;  Int.  No.  179,  Pr.  No.  179, 
by  Mr.  L.  M.  Martin;  Int.  No.  186,  Pr.  No.  186,  by  Mr.  Lincoln; 
Int.  No.  222,  Pr.  No.  224,  by  Mr.  Pelletreau;  Int.  No.  293, 
Pr.  No.  296,  by  Mr.  Leggett;  Int.  No.  300,  Pr.  No.  304,  by  Mr. 
Dunlap;  Int.  No.  404,  Pr.  No.  416,  by  Mr.  Latson;  Int.  No.  418, 
Pr.  No.  430,  by  Mr.  Wadsworth ;  Int.  No.  436,  Pr.  No.  448,  by 
Mr.  R.  B.  Smith;  Int.  No.  472,  Pr.  No.  484,  by  Mr.  Deyo;  Int. 
No.  498,  Pr.  No.  510,  by  Mr.  J.  G.  Saxe;  Int.  No.  540,  Pr.  No. 
555,  by  Mr.  J.  G.  Saxe;  Int.  No.  552,  Pr.  No.  567,  by  Mr. 
Eisner;  Int.  No.  635,  Pr.  No.  651,  by  Mr.  Donnelly;  Int.  No. 
668,  Pr.  No.  684,  by  Mr.  Brackett;  Int.  No.  694-,  Pr.  No.  727, 


Doc.   No.    40  2 

by  Mr.  J.  G.  Saxe,  reported  by  proposed  constitutional  amendment 
entitled  "  Proposed  constitutional  amendment  repealing  sections 
1,  2,  3,  4,  6  and  7  of  article  five  and  creating  a  new  article  five 
in  relation  to  state  officers."  (Int.  No.  716),  which  was  read  twice 
and  said  committee  reports  in  favor  of  the  passage  of  the  same. 

Which  report  was  agreed  to  and  said  proposed  amendment 
ordered  printed  and  referred  to  the  committee  of  the  whole. 

Mr.  Tanner  from  the  committee  on  Governor  and  other  state 
officers  presented  the  following  majority  report. 

Mr.  Tanner,  for  the  Committee  on  Governor  and  Other  State 
Officers,  makes  the  following  report  to  the  Convention : 

The  Governor  and  Other  State  Officers  whose  powers  and  duties 
have  been  referred  to  your  committee  for  consideration  are  pro 
vided  for  in  Articles  IV,  V  and  VIII  of  the  Constitution,  and  in 
a  great  number  and  variety  of  statutes.  There  were  152  depart- 
ments, bureaus,  boards  and  commissions  which,  on  the  first  day  of 
January,  1015,  constituted  the  executive  branch  of  the  State 
government.  In  numerous  instances  these  overlap  in  jurisdic- 
tion, and  conflict  in  operation.  This  evil  has  been  apparent  to 
the  public  in  the  multiplicity  of  inspections  and  conflicting  orders 
coming  from  unrelated  and  independent  bureaus. 

Except  in  some  specific  matters  and  to  a  partial  extent,  these 
agencies  are  independent  of  each  other  and  not  subject  to  the  in- 
spection, supervision  or  control  of  any  superior  authority,  unless 
it  be  the  Governor  himself.  It  is  manifestly  impossible  for  the 
Governor  personally  to  exercise  direct  supervision  over  such  a 
multitude  of  agencies.  They  are,  therefore,  practically  free  from 
effective  control.  They  cannot  practically  be  held  accountable  for 
what  they  do,  or  fail  to  do. 

The  Purpose  or  the  Committee 
The  purpose  of  the  committee  has  been  to  provide  for  a  sys- 
tematic plan  of  departmental  organization ;  to  simplify  and  co- 
ordinate the  administrative  machinery  of  the  State;  to  subject 
every  executive  agency  of  the  State  government  to  practical  ac- 
countability and  to  fix  responsibility  for  the  execution  of  the 
laws. 

Your  committee  has  conferred  with  the  other  committees  hav- 
ing in  charge  related  subjects  and  has  sought  to  conform  the 


3  Doc.  N>.  40 

article  now  reported  to  the  several  plans  outlined  in  their  re- 
ports. 

The  present  Constitution,  article  IV,  section  4,  provides  that 
the  Governor  "  shall  take  care  that  the  laws  are  faithfully 
executed."  It  is  the  opinion  of  your  committee  that  the  executive 
machinery  placed  at  his  disposal  is  not  well  suited  to  the  pur- 
pose, and  makes  economy  and  efficiency  in  the  administration  of 
such  laws  practically  impossible. 

The  Criticism  is  of  Systems,  not  Individuals 

The  changes  recommended  in  this  report  are  not  a  criticism  of 
any  individual  either  in  this  or  in  previous  administrations.  The 
criticism  is  of  the  defective  system  under  which  our  public  ser- 
vants have  labored  at  great  disadvantage  to  render  public  service. 
The  machinery  of  government  is  built  wrongly  and  no  one  under 
present  conditions  can  make  it  work  well.  It  is  this  condition 
to  which  President  Taft  referred  when  he  told  the  committee  that 
a  study  of  the  government  of  the  State  of  New  York  aroused  in 
him  feelings  "  of  profound  admiration  for  the  political  adaptabil- 
ity of  the  people  to  make  a  machine  work  that  nobody  who  had 
any  real  business  sense  would  think  would  work  under  any  con- 
ditions." 

"Remedy  must  be  Provided  by  this  Convention 
The  situation  described  cannot  be  cured  by  the  Legislature 
alone.  It  must  be  provided  for  by  constitutional  enactment. 
The  existing  plan  of  State  government  is  not  a  creation  by  design, 
but  is  a  growth  by  accretion.  In  1894,  when  the  last  Constitu- 
tional Convention  sat,  the  number  of  departments,  boards,  com- 
missions, etc.,  was  39.  Since  that  time,  there  has  been  addition 
after  addition  until  now  the  number  in  the  executive  branch  is 
152,  an  increase  of  113  or  nearly  four-fold.  Within  the  same 
period,  the  cost  of  government,  exclusive  of  interest  on  the  canal 
and  highway  debts  and  of  the  free  school  fund,  has  increased  as 
follows : 

1895 $12,066,646  97 

1900 1 7,696,398  85 

1905 24,511,946  95 

1910 34,791,576  01 

1914 42,408,488  24 


Doc.   No.   40  4 

The  growth  of  expenditures  from  1895  to  1914  is  approxi- 
mately from  $12,000,000  to  $42,000,000,  whereas  the  growth  in 
population  during  the  same  period  was  from  6,513,343  to  9,899,- 
761,  and  the  per  capita  cost  of  State  government  rose  from 
$2.47  in  1895  to  $5.41  in  1914,  an  increase  of  235  per  cent,  dur- 
ing the  last  nineteen  years,  whereas  the  population  of  the  State  in 
the  same  period  has  only  gained  53  per  cent. 

While  due  allowance  must  be  made  for  this  increase  because  of 
the  extended  activities  of  the  government  and  a  bad  financial 
system,  yet  it  is  the  opinion  of  your  committee  that  this  unprec- 
edented growth  is  due  in  great  part  to  the  faulty  and  wasteful 
system,  or  lack  of  system  herein  referred  to. 

Your  committee  has,  therefore,  addressed  itself  to  the  task  of 
formulating  a  plan  which  would  check  the  constant  rise  in  the 
burdens  of  taxation  and  enable  the  people  to  exercise  a  more  direct 
control  over  their  public  servants.  The  plan  proposed  does  not 
change  the  functions  of  the  State,  but  is  confined  to  the  methods 
of  performing  existing  functions.  To  phrase  it  more  simply, 
your  committee  is  not  trying  to  determine  what  the  State  should 
do,  but  to  find  a  better  way  to  do  it. 

Failure  of  Present  System  Kecognized  by  Both  Political 
Parties 

This  failure  in  the  present  system  has  been  recognized  by  both 
of  the  great  political  parties  of  the  State  in  clear  and  explicit 
terms.  In  1914  the  Kepublican  State  platform,  framed  especially 
with  a  view  to  this  revision  of  the  Constitution,  declared : 

The  inefficiency,  extravagance  and  corruption  which  have 
characterized  our  state  government  reveal  the  necessity  of  locating 
the  responsibility  for  misgovernment  in  such  a  way  that  the  people 
of  the  state  can  more  certainly  hold  known  officers  to  accounta- 
bility and  condemnation.  In  this  way  the  people  can  best  secure 
the  satisfactory  accomplishment  of  their  purposes  and  due  re- 
sponsibility for  wrong  doing.  We  recommend  a  substantial  re- 
duction in  the  number  of  elective  officials  by  the  application  of  the 
principles  of  the  short  ballot  to  the  executive  offices  of  the  state. 
To  prevent  multiplication  of  offices  we  recommend  that  the  various 
administrative  functions  of  the  state,  so  far  as  practicable,  be 
vested  in  a  limited  number  of  departments.  The  present  dupli- 
cation of  effort  and  expense  in  the  public  institutions  of  the  state 
should  be  remedied  by  the  establishment  of  a  simpler  and  better 
organized  system. 


5  Doc.  Xo.  40 

With  the  same  realization  of  the  necessity  for  action,  the  Demo- 
cratic platform  of  1914  declared: 

There  should  be  no  divided  authority  or  responsibility  in 
executing  and  administering  the  laws  of  the  state.  The  time  has 
come  to  give  the  people  control  of  their  executive  government. 
The  responsibility  should  be  centered  in  the  governor,  lie  should 
have  the  absolute  power  of  removal.  The  various  boards  and 
commissions  should  be  made  subject  to  the  control  of  the  governor. 
General  rules  should  be  prescribed  by  the  Constitution  on  these 
subjects,  and  for  the  organization  of  new  departments.  The  people 
should  be  able  to  know  whom  to  hold  responsible  for  any  failure 
in  the  execution,  or  mal-administration,  of  their  laws,  and  not  have 
their  attention  divided  and  distracted  by  a  number  of  elective, 
executive  and  administrative  officials,  either  elective  or  appointive, 
but  be  enabled  to  concentrate  their  attentions,  and  to  devote  their 
energies  to  the  election  or  defeat  of  fewer  officials;  therefore,  to 
center  responsibility  for  executive  and  administrative  action,  and 
to  give  full  force  and  effect  to  the  power  of  the  people,  we  favor 
an  amendment  to  the  Constitution  providing  for  the  election  only 
of  the  governor,  lieutenant-governor,  comptroller,  and  attorney- 
general  and  we  pledge  ourselves  to  the  preparation  and  submission 
of  a  scheme  of  constitutional  amendment  which  shall  concentrate 
responsibility  for  executive  management,  shall  simplify  the  admin- 
istrative system  of  the  state  and  shall  provide  general  rules  of 
departmental  organization  for  the  future  guidance  of  the  Legis- 
lature. 

Legislature  Must  Act  Within  Constitutional  Plan 
Provided 
Clearly  the  demand  for  this  change  is  not  a  partisan  one.  The 
problem  has  been  approached  in  this  spirit,  and  we  herewith 
submit  a  grouping  of  all  the  related  administrative  functions  of 
the  State  in  a  systematic  plan  of  co-ordinated  departments.  All 
that  your  Committee  has  attempted  to  do  is  to  provide  on  broad 
lines  a  departmental  system,  leaving  the  important  task  of  the 
internal  organization  of  such  departments  to  the  Legislature,  giv- 
ing to  it  power  to  make  readjustments  therein  whenever  necessary 
and  prohibiting  it  from  creating  any  office  or  functions  of  State 
government  not  assigned  to  one  of  these  departments.  This  will 
prevent  the  further  growth  of  unrelated  and  conflicting  agencies 
which  has  characterized  the  period  since  the  adoption  of  the  Con- 
stitution of  1894  and  give  to  the  general  departments  of  executive 
government  a  stability  beyond  legislative  disturbance. 


Doc.    No.    40  6 

The  present  Constitution  contains  an  enumeration  of  elective 
State  officers,  but  presents  no  plan  of  general  organization.  The 
State  Superintendent  of  Public  Works  and  the  State  Superin- 
tendent of  Prisons  are  made  constitutional  officers,  but  the  Com- 
missioner of  Highways,  the  Superintendent  of  Insurance,  the 
Superintendent  of  Banks,  and  many  others  of  equal  importance, 
are  statutory  only,  and  subject  to  change  by  the  Legislature.  There 
is  no  logical  reason  why  some  departments  should  be  included  in 
the  Constitution  and  others  whose  functions  are  often  similar  in 
nature,  and  of  equal  or  greater  importance,  left  out.  The  un- 
scientific arrangement  in  such  departments  as  are  mentioned  in 
the  Constitution,  is  illustrated  by  the  present  Article  V,  section  3, 
which  provides  that  the  Superintendent  of  Public  Works  shall 
hold  office  until  the  end  of  the  term  of  the  Governor  by  whom  he 
was  appointed,  that  is  for  two  years,  but  provides  that  the  depu- 
ties named  by  the  Superintendent  of  Public  Works  shall  hold 
their  office  for  three  years. 

Natural  Grouping  of  Departments 
The  plan  proposed  by  your  committee  divides  itself  naturally 
into  three  groups,  according  to  the  general  functions  of  the  officers 
or  departments  described. 

First,  the  Attorney-General,  who  is  the  law  officer  of  the  State 
and  the  adviser  of  the  departments,  and  the  Comptroller,  who 
under  the  proposed  system  is  a  State  wide  auditing  officer,  are 
continued  as  elective  officers.  Members  of  the  committee  who  favor 
the  appointment  of  these  officers  have  yielded  their  views  to  others 
who  prefer  their  election.  The  basis  of  this  compromise  is  to  be 
found  in  the  peculiar  relation  which  these  two  officers  hold  to  the 
people  of  the  State  as  a  whole. 

Second,  the  agencies  of  government  which,  from  the  character 
of  their  jurisdiction  and  authority,  cannot  be  considered  as  purely 
executive  arms  of  the  State  government.  These  boards  or  com- 
missions possess,  to  a  large  degree,  judicial  or  legislative  functii  as, 
and  make  rules  and  regulations  under  delegated  authority  from 
the  Legislature.  To  this  class  belong  the  Department  of  Educa- 
tion and  iis  Board  of  Regents,  the  Public  Service,  the  ( Jonservation, 
and  the  Civil  Service  Commissions.  These  sustain  exceptional 
relations  to  the  Governor.  They  serve  for  longer  terms,  and 
their  removal  lias  been  made  more  difficult  than  that  of  the  heads 
of  purely  executive  departments. 


7  Doc.  No.  40 

Third,  the  departments  which  are  strictly  executive  in  nature. 
These  are  the  arms  of  the  Governor  by  which  he  takes  "  care  that 
the  laws  are  faithfully  executed,"  and  for  their  acts  he  is  held 
accountable.  There  was,  accordingly,  a  strong  sentiment  in  the 
committee  in  favor  of  the  independent  appointment  and  removal 
of  these  officers  by  the  Governor.  But  a  compromise  was  finally 
reached  by  providing  that  the  appointments  should  be  subject 
to  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate.  The  heads  of  depart- 
ments thus  appointed  constitute  the  group  of  advisers  on  whom 
the  Governor  must  depend  for  carrying  out  the  policies  of  his 
administration.  His  authority  over  them  should  be  unquestion- 
able and  direct. 

Few  Changes  in  Existing  Departments 
Of  the  nine  civil  executive  departments  referred  to  in  section 
7  of  this  article,  little  change  has  been  proposed  in  the  functions 
of  six ;  to  wit,  departments  of  State,  Health,  Agriculture,  Bank- 
ing, Ensurance,  Labor  and  Industry,  excepting  that  certain  mis- 
cellaneous duties  of  collecting  public  revenues  now  performed  by 
some  of  them  have  been  transferred  to  the  Department  of  Taxation 
and  Finance,  including  the  collection  of  the  automobile  tax  now 
made  by  the  Secretary  of  State;  the  tax  on  foreign  insurance 
companies  now  collected  by  the  Superintendent  of  Insurance ;  the 
charges  on  foreign  bankers  now  collected  by  the  Superintendent 
of  Banks. 

The  Department  of  Public  Works  will  include  the  functions 
of  the  State  Engineer  and  Surveyor,  the  State  Superintendent  of 
Public  Works,  the  State  Commissioner  of  Highways,  the  State  De- 
partment of  Public  Buildings  and  the  State  Architect.  This  con- 
solidation was  recommended  by  the  State  Engineer  and  by  the 
Superintendent  of  Public  Works  and  by  virtually  the  unanimous 
testimony  of  engineers,  both  within  and  without  the  State  service. 
By  the  proposed  Department  of  Charities  and  Corrections,  the 
Committee  has  sought  to  retain  the  advantages  of  the  present 
system  relating  to  the  care  of  the  insane,  by  continuing  the  pro- 
visions of  the  present  Constitution  covering  this  subject.  The 
State  Board  of  Charities,  the  State  Commission  in  Lunacy,  and 
the  State  Commission  of  Prisons  have  been  continued  with  their 
functions  unimpaired,  but  it  is  the  opinion  of  your  Committee 
that  better  co-operation  and  greater  accountability  will  be  secured 
among  the  various  departments  and  institutions  having  care  of 


Doc.   ATo.   40  8 

the  wards  of  the  State  by  the  provision  for  a  Secretary  of  Charities 
and  Corrections  who  shall  have  power  of  inspection  and  super- 
vision over  these  institutions. 

The  Department  of  Taxation  and  Finance  under  the  proposed 
plan  will  be  devoted  to  the  collection  and  care  of  public  revenues. 
It  is  intended  to  be  the  financial  arm  of  the  state  government. 
The  Governor  must  look  to  the  head  of  this  department  as  his 
adviser  on  all  matters  of  state  finance. 

The  Comptroller,  under  the  proposed  plan,  will  represent  the 
people  of  the  State,  directly  commissioned  by  them  to  keep  a 
watch  upon  the  acts  of  all  the  executive  departments  to  see  to  it 
that  the  revenues  of  the  State  are  expended  in  accordance  with  the 
intent  of  the  Legislature;  that  all  the  safeguards  and  limitations 
prescribed  by  law  are  observed ;  and  it  will  be  his  duty  to  call 
the  attention  of  the  representatives  of  the  people  in  the  Legisla- 
ture to  any  wrongdoing  upon  the  part  of  the  executive  officers,  and 
if  the  wrongdoing  is  of  such  a  character  as  to  call  for  legal  redress, 
it  will  be  his  duty  to  call  it  to  the  attention  of  the  attorney-general. 
The  vouchers  representing  the  expenditures  of  the  revenue  of 
the  State  will  come  under  his  scrutiny  and  be  subject  to  his  action 
for  the  protection  of  the  public  treasury. 

It  is  manifest  that  the  officer  who  performs  these  functions 
should  not  himself  be  an  executive  officer  collecting  and  expending 
funds  of  the  State.  The  two  functions  of  the  actor  in  financial 
transactions  and  the  critic  of  the  actor  must  be  separated  if  there 
is  to  be  efficient  criticism.  For  this  reason  the  proper  functions 
of  the  Comptroller  have  been  concentrated  in  the  one  officer, 
who,  because  of  the  nature  of  these  particular  functions,  is  to  be 
elected  by  the  people  so  that  he  may  be  independent  of  the  whole 
executive  government  of  which  he  is  the  critic  and  upon  which  he 
is  the  check,  while  the  active  functions  of  collecting  and  disburs- 
ing the  moneys  of  the  State  have  been  vested  in  another  officer 
who  is  called  the  treasurer  as  the  head  of  the  Department  of  Tax- 
ation and  Finance. 

In  the  extensive  hearings  before  the  committee,  no  one  ques- 
tioned the  serious  evils  which  have  resulted  from  the  defective 
organization  of  government  in  this  State  and  no  one  suggested 
any  general  plan  of  improvement  containing  other  general  princi- 
ples than  those  incorporated  in  this  report,  in  the  opinion  <>i'  your 
committee  the  Convention  must  adopt  such  a  plan  as  this  in  sub- 
stance or  must  fail  to  give  relief  from  the  grave  and  unquestioned 
evils  at  which  this  plan  is  aimed. 


9  Doc.  No.  40 

This  is  a  complete  revision  of  Article  V  excepting  sections  5, 
8  and  9  which  are  subject  to  a  supplemental  report  after  other 
committees  dealing  with  these  subjects  have  reported  to  the  Con- 
vention. 


MINORITY  REPORT 

Mr.  C.  Nicoll  presented  the  following  minority  report. 

With  those  recommendations  of  the  Committee  on  Governor 
and  other  State  officers  which  provide  for  the  classification  of  the 
civil  activities  of  the  State  into  broad  divisions,  each  under  the 
control  of  an  administrative  head  appointed  by  the  Governor,  I  am 
in  hearty  accord. 

I  dissent  from  the  proposal  only  so  far  as  the  Committee  has 
seen  fit  to  depart  from  its  excellent  plan  in  proposing  that  two  of 
the  most  important  divisions  of  government,  that  of  audit  and 
justice,  each  headed  by  a  single  officer,  and  each  peculiarly  a  part 
of  the  executive  department  and  particularly  charged  with  the 
execution  of  the  laws,  be  omitted  from  the  general  arrangement. 
These  offices,  the  Committee  has  provided,  shall  be  selected  in 
another  manner,  to  wit:  by  popular  election. 

Neither  the  offices  of  the  attorney-general  of  the  State  nor  that 
of  the  comptroller  determine  any  policy  of  government  in  which 
the  people  at  large  take  interest.  Important  as  these  officers  no™ 
are  and  more  important  as  they  will  be  if  the  proposal  of  the 
Committee  is  adopted,  the  sole  interest  the  people  have  in  them, 
as  well  as  in  the  other  branches  of  the  executive  department,  is 
simply  that  they  be  honestly  and  efficiently  administered. 

The  attorney-general  should  be  appointed  by  and  responsible  to 
the  Governor  because  an  incident  of  the  executive's  duties  is  the 
enforcement  of  public  policies  by  litigation.  In  fulfilling  the 
mandate  that  the  Governor  shall  take  care  "  that  the  laws  are 
faithfully  executed,"  it  is  vitally  necessary  for  him  to  have  at 
his  command  the  full  legal  force  of  the  State.  It  is  absurd  to  give 
the  Governor  full  power  to  enforce  the  statutes  of  the  State  by 
means  of  the  militia  and  begrudge  him  power  to  enforce  the  laws 
by  the  more  peaceful  process  of  litigation. 


Doc.  No.  40  10 

Further,  an  appointive  attorney-general  being  in  full  confidence 
of  the  administration  would  act  as  legal  adviser  for  other  executive 
departments  and  furnish  them  expert  legal  assistance  in  the 
same  manner  as  it  is  proposed  that  the  Department  of  Public 
Works  will  supply  expert  engineering  assistance  to  other  depart- 
ments. His  retention  as  an  elective  official  means,  on  the  contrary, 
the  creation  of  another  legal  bureau  or  series  of  legal  bureaus 
to  provide  counsel  for  the  Governor  and  his  department  heads. 

The  comptroller  should  be  appointed  because  any  other  method 
of  selection  is  a  serious  impairment  of  the  Governor's  responsi- 
bility to  see  that  the  moneys  of  the  State  are  expended  legally  and 
in  the  manner  and  for  the  purposes,  contemplated  by  the  Legis- 
lature. The  chance  that  the  Governor  and  the  comptroller  might 
conspire  together  to  defraud  the  State  is  remote  and  is  fully 
guarded  against,  by  the  remedies  of  impeachment  provided  else- 
where in  the  Article  and  in  the  Constitution.  Through  a  comp- 
troller appointed  by  and  responsible  to  the  Governor,  an  audit 
would  be  provided,  not  independent  of  the  Governor,  of  course,  but 
which  would  be  free  of  outside  political  pressure  and,  what  is 
possibly  more  important,  free  of  personal  political  ambitions.  The 
election  of  a  comptroller  by  popular  vote  to  watch  the  executive 
and  legislature  is  presenting  him  with  a  letter  of  marque  to  prey 
on  other  departments  and  is  the  creation  of  an  official  whose  success 
will  be  measured  in  the  public  mind  by  his  muck-raking  ability. 

A  Legislature  to  enact  and  an  executive  to  enforce  the  laws 
are  foundation  stones  of  our  government.  Fear  that  by  giving 
the  executive  full  power  to  enforce  the  law  he  may  do  wrong  is 
fear  that  the  people  have  not  intelligence  or  capacity  to  select  their 
Governor  or  their  Legislature,  which  may  remove  him.  It  is  fear 
of  popular  rule;  of  the  hazard  of  democracy.  Rule  by  the  people 
can  be  better  secured  by  giving  to  them  simple  means  for  exercising 
control  through  a  single  efficient  and  harmonious  executive  depart- 
ment, rather  than  by  dividing  that  department  in  a  manner  that 
will  destroy  its  harmony  for  fear  that  the  people  may  sometimes  be 
nn fortunate  in  their  choice. 

Respectfully  submitted, 

COTJRTLANDT    XIOOLL. 


11  Doc.  No.  40 

MINORITY  REPORT 

Mr.  Baldwin  presented  the  following  minority  report: 

I  dissent  from  this  so-called  "  Short-Ballot  Bill."  However 
admirable  the  purposes  the  means  suggested  are  fallacious.  The 
cure  is  worse  than  the  ill.  Centralized  government  might  tend  to 
economy,  but  it  would  inevitably  bring  discontent,  and  discon- 
tent destroys  the  mental  poise  of  democracy.  Popular  government 
may  not  work  for  economy,  but  that  is  not  sufficient  reason  for  its 
destruction. 

If  the  Convention  believe  that  oligarchy  is  better  than  democ- 
racy, let  us  be  frank  and  tell  the  truth,  and  not  deceive  the 
people  with  a  sugar-coated  catch  phrase.  This  plan  would  enthrone 
one  man  for  four  years.  It  would  give  him  direct  control  of  an 
army  of  more  than  25,000  officers  and  employees.  During  his  term 
he  would  direct  State  expenditures  of  more  than  $250,000,000. 
It  would  give  such  power  as  would  have  gladdened  the  heart  of 
Alexander,  the  tyrant  of  Pheree,  or  satiated  the  cupidity  of  that 
modern  dictator,  Castro  of  Venezuela. 

The  average  voter  does  not  understand  the  meaning  of  the 
"  Short  Ballot."  It  is  a  cunning  phrase.  As  applied  to  the  needs 
of  the  people,  it  is  not  suggestive  of  its  true  significance.  It  does 
not  satiate ;  it  starves.  It  should  not  be  called  the  "  Short  Ballot," 
but  the  "  Short  Ration."  It  does  not  give ;  it  takes  away.  It  as- 
sumes incompetency,  and  proceeds  on  the  theory  that  the  people 
desire  to  surrender  their  voting  rights. 

Pure  democracy,  with  its  direct  ballot,  is  impossible  with  10,- 
000,000  of  people.  Its  opposite,  an  aristocracy  or  monarchy,  is 
contrary  to  all  our  traditions.  Our  fathers  gave  us  a  middle 
course,  representative  government.  To  this  let  us  cling.  The 
Constitution  is  the  embodiment  of  the  experience  of  the  past.  It 
needs  repose,  not  change. 

ARTHUR  J.  BALDWIN. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  41 


ADDITIONAL  MINORITY  REPORTS  FROM  THE 
COMMITTEE  ON  GOVERNOR  AND  OTHER  STATE 
OFFICERS 


August  12,  1915 

Mr.  Blauvelt  presented  the  following  minority  report  from  the 
Committee  on  Governor  and  Other  State  Officers: 

It  is  not  the  purpose  of  the  undersigned  in  submitting  the  fol- 
lowing minority  report  to  disagree  with  the  majority  members  of 
the  Committee  on  Governor  and  State  Officers  on  the  fundamental 
proposition  that  the  executive  branch  of  our  State  government 
needs  reforming.  It  must  be  conceded  by  all  students  of  our  ad- 
ministrative system  that  in  the  course  of  its  evolution  the  system 
has  become  complex  and  unwieldy.  This  has  been  due,  in  a  large 
measure,  to  the  manifold  activities  which  the  State  has  embarked 
in  from  time  to  time  since  its  creation,  and  to  the  fact  that  our 
earlier  conventions  have  failed  to  provide  such  a  scheme  of  ex- 
ecutive management  as  may  readily  be  adjusted  by  the  legislature 
to  meet  the  constantly  increasing  needs  of  government  along  ad- 
ministrative lines. 

The  majority  members  of  the  Committee,  in  submitting  their 
proposed  amendments  to  Article  V,  take  the  position  that  adequate 


Doc.  Xo.  41  2 

reforms  can  be  accomplished  and  efficient  and  economical  govern- 
ment maintained  through  the  adoption  of  the  following  propo- 
sitions : 

(1 )  By  a  mandatory  reclassification  of  all  administrative  func- 
tions of  government  into  a  few  defined  groups  and  the  assignment 
of  those  functions,  partly  by  constitutional  provision  and  partly 
by  legislative  enactment,  to  the  several  civil  executive  departments 
named  in  the  proposed  article  submitted  by  them. 

(2  )  By  the  adoption  of  the  so-called  "  Short  Ballot  "  proposal, 
in  a  modified  form,  whereby  the  governor  shall  have  the  power  of 
appointment  of  all  administrative  heads  of  State  departments, 
except  the  Comptroller,  the  Attorney-general  and  the  heads  of  the 
Departments  of  Conservation  and  of  Education. 

(3)  By  giving  a  discretionary  power  of  removal  to  the  Governor 
of  the  chief  executive  officers  appointed  by  him  whose  duties  are 
solely  administrative. 

(1)  By  prohibiting  the  legislature  from  creating  new  depart- 
ments not  named  in  the  article  and  commanding  it  to  assign 
such  new  functions  as  may  be  created,  from  time  to  time,  to  some 
one  of  the  departments  therein  named. 

I  am  not  opposed  to  the  idea  that  there  should  be  a  reclassifica- 
tion and  redistribution  of  the  administrative  agencies  of  govern- 
ment, but  I  do  disagree  with  the  proposition  that  the  Constitution 
should  arbitrarily  assign  particular  powers  and  duties  to  a  depart- 
ment. Such  an  assignment  must,  in  my  opinion  at  least,  neces- 
sarily imply  a  limitation  on  the  power  of  the  legislature  to  create 
a  flexible  administrative  scheme  to  meet  the  practical  necessities 
of  government.  This  objection  is  not  removed  by  the  provisions 
of  Section  19  of  the  proposed  article  which,  among  other  things, 
provides  that  "  the  legislature  may  from  time  to  time  assign  by 
law  new  powers  and  functions  to  officers,  boards  or  commissions 
continued  or  created  under  this  Constitution,  and  increase,  modify 
or  diminish  the  powers  of  such  departments,"  for  the  reason  that 
the  power  of  the  legislature  in  that  respect  is  made  subject  to  the 
limitations  specifically  defining  the  powers  and  duties  of  particular 
departments.  I  believe  that  the  matter  of  reclassification  and 
redistribution  of  powers  should  be  left  wholly  with  the  legislature. 


3  Doc.  No.  41 

I  hold  that  the  term  "  Short  Ballot  "  is  a  misnomer  and  that 
administrative  reform  can  never  be  accomplished  through  the 
mere  shortening  of  the  election  ballot.  I  favor  the  most  rigid 
reforms  in  our  administrative  system  but  I  disagree  with  the 
majority  of  the  Committee  that  such  reforms  can  be  accomplished 
through  the  centralization  of  complete  executive  power  in  the 
Governor  by  giving  to  him  the  power  of  appointment  and  removal 
of  all  administrative  State  Officers.  I  would  not  take  away  from 
the  people  the  right  to  select  those  State  officers,  such  as  the  Sec- 
retary of  State,  Attorney-general,  State  Treasurer  and  Comptrol- 
ler, whose  powers  and  duties  are  and  should  be  independent  of  the 
control  of  the  Governor.  Their  independent  action  is  frequently 
necessary  to  restrain  the  too  often  unwise  exercise  of  power  by 
the  executive. 

I  favor  the  proposition  that  the  Governor  should  be  given  the 
power  of  removal  of  appointive  administrative  officers,  but  I  dis- 
agree with  the  proposition  that  he  should  be  given  the  arbitrary 
power  of  removing  those  officers,  such  as  public  service  commis- 
sioners, civil  service  commissioners  and  the  like,  whose  powers 
are  or  may  be  partly  administrative,  partly  legislative  and  partly 
judicial. 

Lastly,  I  see  no  reason  why  the  Legislature  may  not  well  be 
prohibited  from  creating  new  executive  departments  of  govern- 
ment, provided  sufficient  flexibility  of  action  is  accorded  to  it  in 
making  assignments  of  new  and  additional  governmental  activities. 

I  respectfully  submit  to  the  consideration  of  the  Convention 
the  following  proposed  amendment  which.  I  believe,  is  better 
adapted  to  accomplish  executive  reform  than  any  thus  far  pro- 
posed. 

"ARTICLE  V. 

"  Section  1.  There  shall  be  the  following  civil  executive  de- 
partments under  the  state  government:  Of  state,  of  audit  and 
control,  of  law,  of  finance,  of  public  works,  of  health,  of  agri- 
culture, of  charities  and  corrections,  of  banking,  of  insurance, 
of  education,  of  labor,  of  highways  and  of  internal  affairs,  re- 
spectively.    The  head  of  the  department  of  state  shall  be  the 


Doc.  No.  41  4 

secretary  of  state;  of  audit  and  control,  the  comptroller;  of  law, 
the  attorney-general ;  of  taxation  and  finance,  the  treasurer ;  and 
of  each  of  the  other  departments,  a  commissioner  to  be  appointed" 
as  provided  in  this  article,  except  that  the  department  of  educa- 
tion shall  be  administered  by  or  under  the  direction  of  the  cor- 
poration known  as  the  University  of  the  State  of  New  York, 
which  may  have  a  chief  executive  officer  as  now  or  hereafter  pro- 
vided by  law." 

Section  [1.]  "  2."  The  secretary  of  state,  comptroller,  treas- 
urer [,]  "  and  "  attorney-general  [and  state  engineer  and  sur- 
veyor] shall  "  continue  to "  be  chosen  at  a  general  election,  at 
the  times  and  places  of  electing  the  governor  and  lieutenant- 
governor,  and  shall  hold  their  offices,  respectively,"  for  [two 
years,  except  as  provided  in  section  two  of  this  article.  Each 
of  the  officers  in  this  article  named,  excepting  the  speaker  of  the 
assembly,  shall  at  stated  times  during  his  continuance  in  office, 
receive  for  his  services  a  compensation  which  shall  not  be  in- 
creased or  diminished  during  the  term  for  which  he  shall  have 
been  elected ;  nor  shall  he  receive  to  his  use  any  fees  or  perquisites 
of  office  or  other  compensation.  No  person  shall  be  elected  to 
the  office  of  state  engineer  and  surveyor  who  is  not  a  practical 
civil  engineer.]  "  the  same  term  as  the  governor.  The  state  en- 
gineer and  surveyor  shall  continue  in  office  for  the  term  for  which 
he  was  elected  unless  sooner  removed,  and  at  the  expiration  of  such 
term  the  said  office  is  abolished." 

[§  2.  The  first  election  of  the  secretary  of  state,  comptroller, 
treasurer,  attorney-general  and  state  engineer  and  surveyor,  pur- 
suant to  this  article  shall  be  held  in  the  year  one  thousand 
eight  hundred  and  ninety-five,  and  their  terms  of  office  shall  begin 
on  the  first  day  of  January  following,  and  shall  be  for  three  years. 
At  the  general  election  in  the  year  one  thousand  eight  hundred 
and  ninety-eight,  and  every  two  years  thereafter,  their  successors 
shall  be  chosen  for  the  term  of  two  years.] 

"  Section  3.  Every  commissioner  at  the  head  of  a  civil 
executive  department  hereinbefore  provided  for  and  the  secretary 
of  charities  and  corrections  shall  be  appointed  by  the  governor, 
by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  senate,  and  be  removable 


5  Doc.  No.  41 

at  his  pleasure.  This  section  shall  not  apply  to  the  head  of  the 
department  of  education. 

"  Section  -i.  The  existing  public  service  commissions  are  con- 
tinued and  the  commissioners  now  in  office  shall  hold  their  offices 
until  the  expiration  of  their  terms.  The  terms  of  their  successors 
shall  be  five  years.  Each  commission  shall  have  the  jurisdiction, 
powers  and  duties  it  now  has,  but  nothing"  herein  contained  shall 
prevent  the  legislature  from  enacting  laws  not  inconsistent  with 
this  section  and  article  changing  such  jurisdiction,  powers  and 
duties ;  except  that  the  legislature  shall  not  enact  any  law  pre- 
scribing a  rate  or  charge  or  a  standard  of  sendee,  equipment  or 
operation  for  any  public  utility  until  after  it  has  received  from 
one  of  the  commissions  a  report  thereon  made  after  investigation 
and  hearing  at  which  interested  parties  may  introduce  evidence, 
or  until  after  the  expiration  of  such  time  following  a  request  for 
such  report  as  may  be  prescribed  by  law.  Decisions  and  orders 
of  the  commissions  shall  be  subject  to  review  by  the  courts  in  such 
manner  and  to  such  extent  as  the  legislature  may  provide. 

Section  5.  There  shall  be  a  conservation  commission,  to  consist 
of  nine  commissioners,  whose  terms  of  office  shall  expire  in  nine 
successive  years,  the  first  ending  on  January  first,  one  thousand 
nine  hundred  and  seventeen ;  and  the  terms  of  their  successors 
shall  be  nine  years." 

"  Section  6.  There  shall  be  a  state  civil  service  commission, 
to  consist  of  three  commissioners.  Their  terms  of  office  shall  be 
six  years,  but  the  terms  of  the  first  commissioners  shall  be  so 
classified  that  the  term  of  a  commissioner  shall  empire  every  two 
years  after  the  first  day  of  January,  one  thousand  nine  hundred 
and  seventeen.  Such  commission  shall  see  that  the  provisions  of 
this  article  relating  to  appointments  and  promotions  in  the  civil 
service  of  the  state  and  of  the  civil  divisions  thereof  and  all  laws 
enacted  thereunder  are  faithfully  observed  and  enforced. 

Section  7.  There  shall  be  a  state  workmen's  compensation  com- 
mission, to  consist  of  five  commissioners.  Their  terms  of  office 
shall  be  ten  years,  but  the  terms  of  the  first  commissioners  shall 
be  so  classified  that  the  term  of  a  commissioner  shall  expire  every 
two  vears  after  the  first  day  of  January,  one  thousand  nine  hun- 


Doc.  No.  41  0 

dred  and  seventeen.  Such  commission  shall  see  that  the  provisions 
of  article  one  of  this  constitution  relating  to  compensation  for 
injuries  to  employees  and  for  death  of  employees  resulting  there- 
from and  all  laws  enacted  thereunder  are  faithfully  observed  and 
enforced." 

[Section  3.  A,  superintendent  of  public  works  shall  be  ap- 
pointed by  the  governor,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of 
the  senate,  and  hold  his  office  until  the  end  of  the  term  of  the 
governor  by  whom  he  was  nominated,  and  until  his  successor  is 
appointed  and  qualified.  He  shall  receive  a  compensation  to  be 
fixed  by  law.  He  shall  be  required  by  law  to  give  security  for 
the  faithful  execution  of  his  office  before  entering  upon  the  duties 
thereof.  He  shall  be  charged  with  the  execution  of  all  laws  re- 
lating to  the  repair  and  navigation  of  the  canals,  and  also  of* 
those  relating  to  the  construction  and  improvement  of  the  canals, 
except  so  far  as  the  execution  of  the  laws  relating  to  such  con- 
struction or  improvement  shall  be  confided  to  the  state  engineer 
and  surveyor;  subject  to  the  control  of  the  legislature,  he  shall 
make  the  rules  and  regulations  for  the  navigation  or  use  of  the 
canals.  He  may  be  suspended  or  removed  from  office  by  the 
governor,  whenever,  in  his  judgment,  the  public  interest  shall  so 
require;  but  in  case  of  the  removal  of  such  superintendent  of 
public  works  from  office,  the  governor  shall  file  with  the  secretary 
of  state  a  statement  of  the  cause  of  such  removal,  and  shall  report 
such  removal  and  the  cause  thereof  to  the  legislature  at  its  next- 
session.  The  superintendent  of  public  works  shall  appoint  not 
more  than  three  assistant  superintendents,  whose  duties  shall  be 
prescribed  by  him,  subject  to  modification  by  the  legislature, 
and  who  shall  receive  for  their  services  a  compensation  to  be  fixed 
by  law.  They  shall  hold  their  office  for  three  years,  subject  to 
suspension  or  removal  by  the  superintendent  of  public  works, 
whenever,  in  his  judgment,  the  public  interest  shall  so  require. 
Any  vacancy  in  the  office  of  any  such  assistant  superintendent 
shall  be  filled  for  the  remainder  of  the  term  for  which  ho  was 
appointed,  by  the  superintendent  of  public  works;  but  in  case 
of  the  suspension  or  removal  of  any  such  assistant  superintendent 
by  him,  he  shall  at  once  report  to  the  governor,  in   writing,  the 


7  Doc.  No.  41 

cause  of  such  removal.  All  other  persons  employed  in  the  care  and 
management  of  the  canals,  except  collectors  of  tolls,  and  those 
in  the  department  of  the  state  engineer  and  surveyor,  shall  be 
appointed  by  the  superintendent  of  public  works,  and  be  subject 
to  suspension  or  removal  by  him.  The  superintendent  of  public 
works  shall  perform  all  the  duties  of  the  former  canal  commis- 
sioners, and  board  of  canal  commissioners,  as  now  declared  by 
law,  until  otherwise  provided  by  the  legislature.  The  governor, 
by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  senate,  shall  have 
power  to  fill  vacancies  in  the  office  of  superintendent  of  public 
works ;  if  the  senate  be  not  in  session,  he  may  grant  commissions! 
which  shall  expire  at  the  end  of  the  next  succeeding  session  of  the 
senate.] 

[Section  4.  [A]  "  The  present  "  superintendent  of  state  pris- 
ons shall  be  appointed  by  the  governor,  by  and  with  the  advice  and 
consent  of  the  senate,  and  hold  his  office  for  five  years,  unless 
sooner  removed ;  he  shall  give  security  in  such  amount,  and  with 
such  sureties  as  shall  be  required  by  law  for  the  faithful  discharge 
of  his  duties ;  he  shall  have  the  superintendence,  management  and 
control  of  state  prisons,  subject  to  such  laws  as  now  exist  or  may 
hereafter  be  enacted;  he  shall  appoint  the  agents,  wardens,  phy- 
sicians and  chaplains  of  the  prisons.  The  agent  and  warden  of 
each  prison  shall  appoint  all  other  officers  of  such  prison,  except 
the  clerk,  subject  to  the  approval  of  the  same  by  the  superin- 
tendent. The  comptroller  shall  appoint  the  clerks  of  the  prisons. 
The  superintendent  shall  have  all  the  powers  and  perform  all 
the  duties  not  inconsistent  herewith,  which  were  formerly  had 
and  performed  by  the  inspectors  of  state  prisons.  The  governor 
may  remove  the  superintendent  for  cause  at  any  time,  giving  to 
him  a  copy  of  the  charges  against  him,  and  an  opportunity  to  be 
heard  in  his  defense.] 

"  Section  8.  The  department  of  charities  and  corrections  shall 
be  administered  by  the  secretary  of  charities  and  corrections. 
The  state  board  of  charities,  the  state  commission  in  lunacy,  to  be 
hereafter  known  as  the  state  hospital  commission,  and  the  state 
commission  of  prisons  are  continued  with  all  the  powers  vested 
in  them  by  this  constitution  on  the  first  day  of  September,  one 


Doc.  Xo.  41  8 

thousand  nine  hundred  and  fifteen,  and  with  such  powers  as  have 
heretofore  been  vested  in  them  by  the  legislature,  subject  to  the 
powers  of  the  legislature  to  increase,  modify  or  diminish  the  same 
by  provisions  not  inconsistent  with  this  section.  The  office  of 
superintendent  of  state  prisons  and  the  powers  and  duties  attach- 
ing thereto,  as  prescribed  by  law  or  by  the  provisions  of  this  con- 
stitution as  existing  on  the  thirty-first  day  of  December,  one  thou- 
sand nine  hundred  and  fifteen,  shall  continue,  subject  to  the  power 
of  the  legislature  to  modify  or  enlarge  such  powers  and  duties  not 
inconsistent  with  said  provisions  of  the  constitution,  until  the  first 
day  of  January,  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  seventeen,  and 
the  present  incumbent,  unless  sooner  removed  and  a  successor  ap- 
pointed under  said  provisions  of  the  constitution,  shall  continue 
until  that  day,  when  such  office  shall  be  abolished.  Thereafter 
such  powers  and  duties  shall  continue  and  devolve  upon  the  said 
secretary,  subject  to  such  power  of  the  legislature  to  modify  and 
enlarge  the  same  not  inconsistent  with  said  provisions  of  the  con- 
stitution or  of  this  section.  Such  secretary  shall  have  power  of  in- 
spection and  supervision  of  all  state  charitable  institutions,  state 
hospitals  for  the  insane,  state  prisons  and  other  state  correctional 
institutions.  He  shall  take  care  that  all  the  laws  relating  to  such 
institutions  are  faithfully  observed  and  shall  perform  such  other 
duties  in  relation  to  the  charities  and  corrections  of  the  state  and 
of  any  civil  division  thereof  as  may  be  imposed  upon  him  by  law. 
Existing  boards  of  managers  of  institutions  referred  to  in  this 
section  are  continued  until  the  legislature  shall  otherwise  direct." 
Section  [5]  9.  The  lieutenant-governor,  speaker  of  the  assem- 
bly, secretary  of  state,  comptroller,  treasurer  [,]  "and"  attorney- 
general  ","  and  "  the  "  state  engineer  and  surveyor  "  while  such 
office  continue*,"  shall  ",  unless  the  legislature  otherwise  provides,'' 
be  the  commissioners  of  the  land  office.  The  lieutenant-governor, 
secretary  of  state,  comptroller,  treasurer  and  attorney-general 
shall,  "  except  as  otherwise  provided  in  this  article,"  be  the  com- 
missioners of  the  canal  fund.  The  canal  board  shall  consist  of  the 
commissioners  of  the  canal  fund  |,J  "find  of"  the  state  engineer 
and  surveyor  |  ,]  and  [the]  superintendent  of  public  works  "  while 
such  offices  continue." 


9  Doc.  No.  41 

[Section  6.  The  powers  and  duties  of  the  respective  boards,  and 
of  the  several  officers  in  this  article  mentioned,  shall  be  such  as 
now  are  or  hereafter  may  be  prescribed  by  law.] 

Section  [7.]  "  10."  The  treasurer  may  be  suspended  from  of- 
fice by  the  governor,  during  the  recess  of  the  legislature,  and 
until  thirty  days  after  the  commencement  of  the  next  session  of 
the  legislature,  whenever  it  shall  appear  to  him  that  such  treasurer 
has,  in  any  particular,  violated  his  duty.  The  governor  shall  ap- 
point a  competent  person  to  discharge  the  duties  of  the  office  dur- 
ing such  suspension  of  the  treasurer. 

[Section  8.  All  offices  for  the  webbing,  gauging,  measuring, 
culling  or  inspecting  any  merchandise,  produce,  manufacture  or 
commodity  whatever,  are  hereby  abolished;  and  no  such  office 
shall  hereafter  be  created  by  law;  but  nothing  in  this  section 
contained  shall  abrogate  any  office  created  for  the  purpose  of  pro- 
tecting the  public  health  or  the  interests  of  the  state  in  its  prop- 
erty, revenue,  tolls  or  purchases,  or  of  supplying  the  people  with 
correct  standards  of  weights  and  measures,  or  shall  prevent  the 
creation  of  any  office  for  such  purposes  hereafter.] 

Section  [9.]  "  11."  Appointments  and  promotions  in  the  civil 
service  of  the  state,  and  of  all  the  civil  divisions  thereof,  including 
cities  and  villages,  shall  be  made  according  to  merit  and  fitness 
to  be  ascertained,  so  far  as  practicable,  by  examinations,  which, 
so  far  as  practicable,  shall  be  competitive ;  provided,  however,  that 
honorably  discharged  soldiers  and  sailors  from  the  army  and 
navy  of  the  United  States  in  the  late  civil  war,  who  are  citizens 
and  residents  of  this  state,  shall  be  entitled  to  preference  in  ap- 
pointment and  promotion,  without  regard  to  their  standing  on 
any  list  from  which  such  appointment  or  promotion  may  be  made. 
Laws  shall  be  made  to  provide  for  the  enforcement  of  this  section. 

"  Section  12.  The  canal  board  and  the  offices  of  commissioners 
of  the  canal  fund,  as  such,  shall  be  abolished  from  and  after  the 
first  day  of  January,  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  sixteen  and 
the  powers  and  duties  attaching  to  such  office  at  that  time,  by  this 
constitution  or  by  law,  shall  devolve  upon  the  department  of  public 
works,  subjeci  to  the  power  of  the  legislature  to  enlarge  or  modify 
the  same  not  inconsistent  with  the  provisions  of  this  constitu- 
tion relating  to  such  offices  and  board.     The  office  of  superin- 


Doc.  No.  41  10 

tendent  of  public  works  and  the  powers  and  duties  attaching 
thereto,  as  prescribed  by  law  or  by  the  provisions  of  this  consti- 
tution as  existing  on  the  thirty-first  day  of  December;,  one  thou- 
sand nine  hundred  and  fifteen,  shall  continue,  subject  to  the  power 
of  the  legislature  to  modify  or  enlarge  such  powers  and  duties 
not  inconsistent  with  said  provisions  of  this  constitution,  until 
the  first  day  of  January,  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  seven- 
teen, and  the  present  incumbent  of  such  office,  unless  sooner  re>- 
moved  and  a  successor  appointed  under  said  provisions  of  this 
constitution,  shall  continue  until  that  day,  when  such  office  shall 
be  abolished.  Thereafter  such  powers  and  duties  shall  continue 
and  devolve  upon  said  department,  subject  to  such  power  of  the 
legislature  to  modify  and  enlarge  the  same  not  inconsistent  with 
said  provisions  of  this  constitution.  The  powers  and  duties  now 
exercised  by  any  board,  division,  authorities  or  subordinates  of 
the  existing  department  of  labor  in  relation  to  workmen's  compen- 
sation shall  on  such  date  devolve  upon  the  workmen's  compensa- 
tion commission  created  by  this  article. 

"  Section  13.  The  legislature  shall  distribute  among  the  several 
executive  departments  and  the  respective  commissions  provided 
for  in  this  article  all  the  administrative  powers  and  duties  now 
exercised  by  the  state  through  any  boards,  officers,  bodies  or  com- 
missions thereof,  not  inconsistent  with  the  provisions  of  this 
article  which  include  particular  powers  and  duties  in  the  functions 
of  a  department  or  commission.  Such  distribution  shall  be  made 
in  such  manner  that  no  two  or  more  departments  or  commissions 
shall  have  powers  and  duties  relating  to  the  same  matter ;  but  the 
legislature  shall  provide  for  the  exchange  of  data,  reports  and 
information  between  departments  and  commissions  where  neces- 
sary to  facilitate  the  work  of  any  department  or  commission. 
Where  state  functions  are  or  shall  be  exercised  by  local  authorities 
with  reference  to  a  given  subject,  such  authorities  shall  report 
and  account  to  the  department  or  commission  having  charge  of  the 
same  subject.  Except  as  otherwise  expressly  provided  in  this 
article,  the  legislature  may  continue  existing  offices,  departments, 
boards  and  commissions  or  create  new  ones,  but  they  shall  be 
placed  within  and  subordinated  to  the  executive  departments  or 


11  Doc.  No.  41 

the  commissions  created  by  this  article.  Except  as  otherwise  pro- 
vided in  this  article,  existing  state  departments,  boards,  offices 
and  commissions  are  continued  with  their  existing  powers  and 
duties,  subject  to  the  power  of  the  legislature  to  enlarge  or  modify 
the  same,  until  the  legislature  shall  distribute  their  powers  and 
duties  as  above  provided ;  but  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  legislature 
to  make  such  distribution  at  the  first  session  following  the  adop- 
tion of  this  constitution  or  as  soon  as  practicable  thereafter. 
Existing  appointive  officers  under  the  state  government  shall  hold 
office  until  the  expiration  of  their  respective  terms,  unless  sooner 
removed  according  to  law,  but  nothing  herein  contained  shall 
prevent  reorganizing  their  several  offices  by  placing  the  same 
under  any  of  the  departments  or  commissions  provided  for  in 
this  article. 

"  Section  14.  The  commissioners  of  the  public  service  commis- 
sions, civil  service  commission,  workmen's  compensation  commis- 
sion and  conservation  commission  shall  be  appointed  by  the  gov- 
ernor by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  senate.  Such 
commissioners,  except  the  commissioners  of  conservation,  shall 
receive  a  compensation  to  be  fixed  by  law  which  shall  not  be 
increased  or  diminished  during  their  respective  terms.  Heads  of 
departments  appointed  by  the  governor  shall  receive  a  compen- 
sation to  be  fixed  by  law  which  shall  not  be  increased  or  diminished 
during  the  term  of  the  governor  making  the  appointments.  Any 
commissioner  or  head  of  a  department  shall,  unless  sooner  re- 
moved, hold  office  until  the  appointment  and  qualification  of  his 
successor. 

"  Section  15.  All  officers  and  commissioners  named  in  this 
article  may  be  removed  from  office  by  impeachment  in  the  same 
manner  as  the  governor.  The  attorney-general,  comptroller, 
treasurer  and  secretary  of  state,  and  commissioners  provided 
for  in  this  article  whose  appointment  is  made  by  the  governor 
by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  senate  for  fixed  terms, 
may  also  be  removed  by  the  senate  by  a  vote  of  two-thirds  of  all 
the  members  elected  thereto,  upon  the  recommendation  of  the 
governor,  stating  the  grounds  therefor. 

Section  "  16."  Vacancies  occurring  in  the  offices  of  attorney- 
general,  comptroller  or  secretary  of  state  shall  be  filled  for  the  re- 


Doc.  No.  41  12 

mainder  of  the  term  at  the  next  ensuing  general  election  happening 
not  less  than  three  months  after  such  vacancy  occurs.  Until  the 
vacancy  be  so  filled  by  election,  the  governor,  or  if  the  senate  be 
in  session,  the  Governor  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of 
the  senate,  may  fill  such  vacancy  by  appointment  which  shall 
continue  until  the  first  day  of  the  political  year  next  succeeding 
the  election  at  which  such  office  may  be  filled.  A  vacancy  occur- 
ring in  a  board  or  commission  appointed  by  the  governor  by  and 
with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  senate  for  a  fixed  term  shall 
be  filled  for  the  unexpired  term  in  the  same  manner  as  an  original 
appointment,  except  that  a  vacancy  occurring  or  existing  while  the 
senate  is  not  in  session  shall  be  filled  by  the  governor  by  appoint- 
ment for  a  term  expiring  at  the  end  of  twenty  days  from  the  com- 
mencement of  the  next  meeting  of  the  senate." 

GEORGE  A.  BLAUVELT. 


Mr.  Boekes  presented  the  following  minority  report  from  the 
Committee  on  Governor  and  Other  State  Officers. 

Although  favoring  much  of  the  majority  proposal,  I  am  unable 
to  agree  with  that  part  of  it  which  would  prevent  the  Legislature 
from  imposing  additional  duties  upon  the  Comptroller  and  with 
that  part  which  would  prevent  the  Legislature  from  establishing 
any  other  separate  subdivisions  of  government  than  those  specified 
in  the  committee's  bill.  I  fear  that  such  restrictions  would  con- 
stitute too  much  of  a  straight-jacket  around  governmental 
activity  to  allow  for  wholesome,  natural  growth. 

I  am  also  unable  to  agree  with  that  part  of  the  majority  proposal 
which  would  increase  the  relative  power  of  the  executive  by 
appointment  instead  of  popular  election  of  all  other  important 
State  officers  except  Attorney-General,  as  a  cure  for  the  present  evil 
extravagance.  I  believe  the  cause  of  extravagance  was  the  con- 
tinually increasing  power  of  appointment  given  to  the  Governor 
until  proper  check  and  Ixilance  between  Governor  and  Legislature 
were  gone  and  the  Governor  and  his  appointees  became  over- 
powerful  to  push  his  "  my  policies  "  through  the  Legislature,  he 
taking  the  credit  for  the  new  idea  and  the  Legislature  taking  the 


13  Doc.  No.  41 

blame  for  the  new  expense.  If  this  is  the  cause  the  remedy  is 
sure.  It  is  to  restore  genuine  co-ordination  by  the  simple  ex^ 
pedient  of  electing  more  administrative  officers.  This  will  no^ 
only  restore  the  lost  balance  but  also  increase  popular  watchful- 
ness and  interest.  Agriculture,  Highways,  State  Engineering, 
Public  Works,  Elections  and  similar  matters  which  constantly 
stand  out  in  plain  sight  of  every  voter  of  the  State  should  have 
elective  rather  than  appointive  heads  if  the  people  are  still  to  be 
self-governing  and  watchful  and  willing  to  come  out  at  elections 
and  competent  to  approve  or  disapprove  the  record  of  the  party 
in  power.  I  fear  that  to  make  the  Governor  all  powerful  would 
make  of  elections  a  worthless  wrangle  over  personalities  instead 
of  great  educational  campaigns. 

I  fear  still  more  the  result  of  making  the  chief  fiscal  officer 

appointive. 

Respectfully  submitted, 

GEORGE  L.  BOCKES. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN   CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  42 


REPORT  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  THE  JUDICIARY 
RELATIVE  TO  THE  PROPOSED  AMENDED  JUDICIARY 
ARTICLE 


A.ugust  13,  1915 
To  the  Convention: 

Your  Committee  on  the  Judiciary  has  had  referred  to  it  by  the 
Convention  153  proposed  constitutional  amendments,  almost  all 
of  which  apply  to  some  portion  of  Article  VI  of  the  present  Con- 
stitution. It  has  given  public  hearings  to  the  proposers  and  to 
all  others  who  have  expressed  a  desire  to  be  heard  respecting  these 
measures,  as  well  as  to  representatives  of  the  State  Bar  Associa- 
tion and  of  Associations  of  the  Bar  of  cities  and  counties,  with 
respect  to  these  and  many  other  matters  concerning  the  administra- 
tion of  justice.  It  has  had  the  benefit  of  the  personal  attendance 
before  it  of  the  Chief  Judge  and  of  all  the  living  ex-Chief  Judges 
of  the  Court  o£  Appeals,  the  Presiding  Justices  of  two  of  the 
Appellate  Divisions  of  the  Supreme  Court,  Justices  of  the  Su- 
preme Court,  County  Judges,  Surrogates,  and  numerous  other  offi- 
cials and  citizens,  and  has  heard  a  full  expression  of  their  views 
upon  matters  within  the  competence  of  your  Committee,  besides 
which  it  has  invited  and  received  written  expressions  of  opinion 
from  many  other  judges,  lawyers  and  citizens.     The  statements, 


Doc.  No.  42  2 

views  and  recommendations  thus  submitted  have  been  carefully 
considered,  and  your  Committee  has  prepared  and  herewith  reports 
an  amended  Judiciary  Article  to  take  the  place  of  the  present 
Sixth  Article  of  the  Constitution,  and  recommends  its  adoption. 
Before  describing  the  proposed  changes,  a  few  words  may  properly 
be  said  as  to  the  prime  considerations  which  have  controlled  your 
Committee  in  its  recommendations. 

Laws  Delays 

There  is  no  subject  affecting  the  welfare  of  the  people,  which 
has  occasioned  more  complaint  in  recent  years  than  that  of  delays 
in  the  administration  of  justice,  and  your  Committee  has  given 
especial  consideration  to  the  present  condition  of  the  administra- 
tion of  the  law  in  this  State,  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining,  first, 
to  what  extent  undue  and  avoidable  delay  occurs  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  law;  second,  the  causes  of  such  delay,  and  third, 
by  what  provisions  these  causes  may  best  be  removed. 

No  statistics  are  available  from  which  to  determine  the  extent 
of  the  undue  delay  which  occurs  after  actions  are  commenced  and 
before  they  are  brought  to  issue  and  placed  on  the  trial  calendars 
of  the  courts.  But  that  the  Code  of  Civil  Procedure  furnishes 
ample  opportunities  for  such  delay  through  the  various  inter- 
locutory and  procedural  motions  which  it  permits  or  invites,  is 
well  known  to  all  practitioners.  Delays  in  securing  trial  after  a 
case  is  on  the  trial  court  calendars  at  the  present  time  are  not  so 
great  as  they  were  a  few  years  ago,  and  these  delays,  in  the  opinion 
of  your  Committee,  are  due  in  far  larger  measure  to  litigants  and 
their  attorneys,  than  to  the  organization  and  conduct  of  the  courts. 
Nevertheless,  even  when  both  parties  are  ready  and  anxious  for 
trial,  it  requires  a  period  of  from  eight  months  to  one  year  after 
a  case  has  been  placed  upon  the  trial  term  calendar  in  the  first 
judicial  district  and  in  several  of  the  counties  in  the  second  and 
ninth  districts  before  it  can  be  reached  for  trial.  About  three 
months  or  less  is  required  at  special  term  in  the  counties  of  New 
York  and  Kings,  and  a  somewhat  longer  time  in  other  counties  in 
the  districts  mentioned.  In  the  Appellate  Divisions  of  the 
Supreme  Court,  and  in  the  Appellate  Terms,  in  the  first  and 
second  departments,  cases  may  be  reached  for  argument  at  the 
monthly  term  to  which  the  appeal  is  taken ;  but  in  the  first  depart- 
ment, the  volume  of  appeals  and  its  continued  increase  are  such, 


3  Doc.  No.  42 

that  your  Committee  is  satisfied  that  without  some  radical  relief 
the  appellate  courts  cannot  continue  to  keep  abreast  with  the 
business  before  them.  In  the  Court  of  Appeals,  nearly  two  years 
necessarily  elapse  between  the  filing  of  a  return  on  appeal  and  the 
hearing,  unless  the  cause  is  preferred  by  law.  The  Court  of 
Appeals  has  made  up  no  calendar  of  pending  cases  since  May, 
1914,  and  on  May  21,  1015,  there  were  622  cases  pending  un- 
determined in  that  court,  including  the  undisposed  of  cases  on  the 
calendar  and  those  in  which  returns  were  filed  after  the  calendar 
was  made  up. 

Civil  Procedure 

Underlying  all  these  conditions,  is  a  more  fundamental  cause 
with  which  your  Committee  has  sought  to  deal,  and  that  is  the 
character  of  the  civil  procedure  prescribed  by  law  for  courts  of 
record  in  this  State.  The  vice  of  this  system  lies,  not  simply  in 
the  enormous  body  of  complex  and  conflicting  legislative  rules 
which  constitute  the  Code  of  Civil  Procedure,  but  in  the  un- 
certainty of  those  rules,  resulting  from  constant  legislative  tink- 
ering. 

The  entire  legal  profession,  as  well  as  representative  public 
bodies  of  various  kinds,  have  for  several  years  past  advocated 
a  change  in  the  present  complicated  and  unwieldy  system  of 
judicial  procedure  established  by  the  Code,  and  the  technicalities 
and  uncertainties  resulting  from  constant  legislative  amendment 
of  it.  In  recognition  of  this  demand,  the  Legislature  in  the  year 
1913  constituted  a  commission  which  at  its  last  session  submitted 
a  report  embodying  a  short  practice  act  in  seventy-one  sections, 
and  a  body  of  rules  for  the  regulation  of  procedure  in  the  principal 
courts  of  record  in  accordance  with  this  practice  act.  The  re- 
port was  transmitted  to  the  Legislature  by  the  Governor  on 
April  21,  1915,  and,  pursuant  to  his  recommendation,  the  Legis- 
lature promptly  appointed  a  joint  committee  to  examine  the  same 
and  report  upon  it  at  the  1916  session.  While  the  time  permitted 
for  its  examination  has  been  too  short  to  justify  your  Committee 
in  recommending  that  the  Legislature  be  required  to  enact  this 
particular  measure  into  law,  yet  the  principles  upon  which  it  is 
framed  are  those  which  have  been  almost  universally  approved 
and  advocated  by  the  bar,  and  your  Committee  therefore  feels 
justified  in  reporting  a  provision  making  it  the  duty  of  the  Legis- 
ture  to  act  upon  the  report  at  its  next  session,  and  to  enact  a  brief 
and  simple  practice  act, —  whether  that  now  recommended,  or 


Doc.  No.  42  4 

another  —  and  adopt  a  separate  body  of  civil  practice  rules  for 
the  regulation  of  procedure  in  the  principal  courts  of  the  State. 
For  the  purpose  of  ending  the  practive  of  constant  legislative 
amendment,  which  hitherto  has  rendered  the  law  of  civil  pro- 
cedure uncertain,  and  thus  fostered  and  encouraged  vexatious  and 
unnecessary  litigation  and  delays  in  the  administration  of  jus- 
tice, your  Committee  recommends  that  the  Legislature  be  em- 
powered at  intervals  of  not  less  than  five  years  to  appoint  a 
commission  to  consider  and  report  what  changes,  if  any,  should 
be  made  in  the  law  and  in  the  rules  governing  civil  procedure, 
that  the  Legislature  shall  act  upon  the  report  of  such  commission 
by  a  single  bill,  and  that  subject  only  to  this  provision,  the  power 
to  make  and  alter  the  rules  governing  civil  procedure  be  vested 
in  the  Judges  of  the  Court  of  Appeals  and  the  Supreme  Court, 
and  the  Legislature  prohibited  from  enacting  any  law  affecting 
the  same  except  at  the  request  of  those  Judges.  The  enactment 
of  this  provision  will  in  the  opinion  of  your  Committee  constitute 
a  long  step  forward  in  the  simplification  of  the  civil  procedure  of 
this  State. 

Supreme  Court  Commissioners 

Your  Committee  has  also  provided  for  the  appointment  by  the 
Appellate  Divisions  in  the  First  and  Second  Judicial  Departments 
of  such  number  of  Supreme  Court  Commissioners  as  they  may 
deem  necessary  who  must  be  members  of  the  bar  of  not  less  than 
ten  years  standing  and  who  shall  not  practice  law  during  their 
tenure  of  office.  Such  Commissioners  are  to  have  power  to  act  as 
commissioners  to  fix  compensation  when  private  property  is  taken 
for  public  use,  and  to  perform  such  other  and  further  duties  as 
may  be  devolved  upon  them  by  special  order  or  rule  of  court 

These  commissioners  may  be  utilized  under  the  new  practice 
rules  to  determine  many  of  the  questions  of  procedure  that  now 
occupy  the  attention  of  the  courts  to  the  exclusion  of  more  im- 
portant matters. 

Official  Referees 

Your  Committee  has  also  provided  for  a  continuance  of  the 
official  referees,  heretofore  appointed  pursuant  to  law  from  among 
judges  whose  terms  of  office  have  expired,  and  requires  that  in  the 
future  they  be  appointed  by  the  Court  of  Appeals  from  among 
judges  of  the  Court  of  Appeals  and  by  the  Appellate  Divisions 
from  among  justices  of  the  Supreme  Court  whose  terms  have 


5  Doc.  No.  42 

expired  and  who  at  the  time  of  their  retirement  shall  have  served 
at  least  twenty  years  as  judges  of  any  court  of  record,  or  at 
least  one  full  term  of  fourteen  years  as  justices  of  the  Su- 
preme Court  or  judge  of  the  Court  of  Appeals.  In  this  way, 
the  State  secures  the  services  of  a  body  of  highly  trained  judicial 
officers,  at  such  compensation  as  the  Legislature  may  fix;  and  on 
the  other  hand,  a  reasonable  provision  is  made  for  the  continued' 
employment  of  men  whose  vigor  of  body  and  intellect  enables  them 
to  perform  valuable  services  in  the  administration  of  justice,  even 
although  they  may  have  passed  the  age  limit  set  for  their  con- 
tinuance on  the  bench. 

Attorneys 

1  losely  connected  with  the  subject  of  undue  delays  in  the  ad- 
ministration of  justice,  is  the  question  of  qualifications  and  rules 
regulating  the  admission  to  practice  of  attorneys  and  counsellors 
in  the  courts  of  the  State.  The  Legislature  has  devolved  this 
jurisdiction  by  law  upon  the  Court  of  Appeals,  and  in  the  judg- 
ment of  your  Committee  the  Constitution  should  confirm  this 
power  in  the  court. 

Statistics 

Your  Committee  lias  experienced  some  difficulty  in  securing 
comprehensive  statistics  regarding  the  judicial  business  of  the 
State,  due  to  the  fact  that  there  is  no  provision  of  law  requiring 
courts  to  prepare  and  furnish  periodically  to  any  public  official, 
or  to  publish,  statistics  of  the  judicial  business.  A  report  pre- 
pared by  the  clerks  of  the  Supreme  Court  in  the  First  Judicial 
Department  for  the  year  1914,  furnishes  a  model  which  might 
well  be  followed  by  the  courts  in  other  departments,  and  in  order 
that  a  uniform  rule  shall  be  established  respecting  this  subject, 
your  Committee  recommends  that  the  Legislature  be  authorized 
to  provide  for  the  collection,  compilation  and  publication  annually 
of  the  civil  and  criminal  judicial  statistics  of  the  State. 

Organization  and  Jurisdiction  of  Courts 

For  the  purpose  of  providing  the  requisite  judicial  machinery 
for  the  prompt  disposal  of  litigation  without  delay,  your  Com- 
mittee recommends  a  number  of  changes  in  the  organization  and 
jurisdiction  of  the  courts,  and  a  slight  increase  in  the  number  of 
J™ 


Doc.  No.  42  6 

The  number  of  justices  composing  the  Appellate  Division  of 
the  Supreme  Court  in  the  First  Department,  is  increased  from 
seven  to  not  less  than  ten  nor  more  than  twelve,  and  in  the  Second 
Department  from  five  to  seven.  To  supply  this  enlarged  force, 
provision  is  made  for  two  new  justices  in  the  first  judicial  district. 

The  volume  of  appeals  which  at  present  come  to  the  Appellate 
Division  of  the  Supreme  Court  in  the  First  Department,  amount- 
ing during  the  last  year  to  upwards  of  1,500  cases,  besides  840 
original  motions,  is  far  greater  than  the  court  as  at  present  con- 
stituted can  properly  continue  to  dispose  of.  It  is  true  that  until 
the  present  time  the  remarkable  body  of  men  now  constituting 
that  court  has  been  able  to  pass  upon  and  decide  that  number  of 
cases,  but  they  have  done  so  by  labors  which  should  not  be  con- 
tinuously required  by  the  State  of  any  body  of  judges,  and  which 
in  framing  the  fundamental  law  of  the  State  should  not  be  as- 
sumed as  the  criterion  of  the  amount  of  work  disposable  by  any 
court  of  seven  judges.  No  other  court  in  the  State  passes  upon 
much  more  than  one-half  the  number  of  cases  annually  determined 
by  the  Appellate  Division  in  the  First  Department,  except  the 
Appellate  Division  in  the  Second  Department  which  in  1914 
decided  about  70  per  cent,  of  that  number.  The  continued  in- 
crease in  importance  of  the  city  of  New  York  as  a  great,  if  not  the 
greatest  commercial  center  of  the  world,  brings  into  the  courts  in 
the  First  Department  a  constantly  increasing  volume  of  litigation, 
involving  questions  affecting,  not  merely  the  citizens  of  that  depart- 
ment but  those  of  the  entire  State  and  of  almost  every  other  State 
and  Nation.  The  average  number  of  cases  disposed  of  (not  includ- 
ing original  motions  in  the  court)  by  the  Appellate  Division  of  the 
First  Department  in  each  of  the  five  years  ending  1904  was  1,032  ; 
during  the  five  years  ending  1914,  1,389.  The  number  of  appeals 
decided  in  1904  was  1,053  ;  in  1914  it  was  1,534.  Your  Committee 
feels  great  doubt  as  to  whether  or  not  even  a  court  of  ten  or  twelve 
judges,  five  of  whom  are  sitting  continuously  four  weeks  in  every 
month,  can  dispose  of  such  a  volume  of  business,  and  it  has  there- 
fore provided  that  the  court  may,  should  it  find  it  necessary,  sit  in 
two  parts,  each  composed  of  five  justices,  both  under  the  direction 
of  one  Presiding  Justice.  It  also  proposes  to  authorize  the  Ap- 
pellate Division  to  call  in  other  justices  from  the  Supreme  Court 
for  temporary  service  in  case  of  the  illness  or  absence  of  one  of  the 
regularly  assigned  justices.  The  provisions  in  the  present  Con- 
stitution authorizing  the  Governor  to  assign  additional  justices  to 


7  Doc.  No.  42 

an  Appellate  Division  on  request,  are  retained,  and  the  provisions 
for  transferring  cases  from  one  division  to  another  by  vote  of  the 
Presiding  Justices  in  case  an  Appellate  Division  is  unable  to  dis- 
pose of  its  business  within  a  reasonable  time,  are  retained  and  made 
mandatory. 

Appellate  Terms 

To  further  relieve  the  Appellate  Divisions  in  the  First  and 
Second  Departments,  your  Committee  proposes  to  increase  the 
number  of  justices  assignable  to  the  Appellate  Terms  from  three 
to  five,  and  to  give  to  those  branches  of  the  court  greater 
effectiveness  by  making  the  assignments  for  periods  of  one  year. 
All  appeals  from  judgments  and  orders  in  civil  cases,  made 
by  County  Courts  within  those  departments,  as  well  as  by  the 
City  Court  of  New  York,  the  Municipal  Court  of  the  City  of 
New  York,  the  Court  of  Special  Sessions  of  the  City  of  New  York, 
and  all  other  inferior  or  local  courts,  except  those  held  by  Jus- 
tices of  the  Peace,  are  required  to  be  heard  at  the  Appellate 
Term,  and  the  Legislature  is  empowered  to  enlarge  or  modify  the 
jurisdiction  of  that  court  and  the  right  of  appeal  thereto. 

Your  Committee  considered  a  provision  giving  to  the  Appel- 
late Term  jurisdiction  of  appeals  from  all  interlocutory  and  pro- 
cedural orders,  but  decided  that  it  would  not  be  practicable  sub- 
stantially to  add  to  the  volume  of  work  now  disposed  of  by  this 
Court.  The  Appellate  Term  in  the  First  Department  during  the 
year  1914  heard  and  decided  2,150  appeals  from  judgments  and 
orders  of  the  Municipal  Court  of  the  City  of  New  York  and  the 
City  Court  of  New  York.  The  measure  recommended  by  your 
Committee  would  give  to  it  also  jurisdiction  of  appeals  from  the 
Court  of  Special  Sessions.  By  allowing  the  Appellate  Division 
to  assign  five  justices  to  sit  at  the  Appellate  Term,  provision  is 
made  for  relieving  undue  pressure  upon  the  court.  To  add 
further  to  its  jurisdiction,  would  require  the  permanent  designa- 
tion of  a  larger  number  of  justices  and  interfere  with  the  neces- 
sary assignments  for  the  Trial  and  Special  Terms.  The  judges 
sitting  in  the  Appellate  Term  are  not  prohibited  from  transacting 
any  other  business  of  the  court,  and  are  therefore  available  for 
interlocutory  applications,  but  your  Committee  confidently  expects 
that  the  result  of  the  operations  of  the  new  practice  rules,  when 
adopted,  will  be  very  greatly  to  diminish  the  amount  of  litiga- 
tion from  purely  procedural  matters. 


Doc.  No.  42 


Court  of  Appeals 


Perhaps  the  most  troublesome  question  with  which  your  Com- 
mittee has  had  to  deal,  is  the  composition  and  jurisdiction  of  the 
Court  of  Appeals.  The  Constitution  of  1894,  by  creating  the 
Appellate  Divisions  as  courts  of  appeal  of  general  jurisdiction, 
and  limiting  the  Court  of  Appeals  to  review  of  questions  of 
law  only,  sought  to  confine  the  Court  of  Appeals  to  the 
function  of  settling  the  law  for  the  entire  State  in  the 
interests  of  uniformity  and  public  justice,  as  distinguished 
from  the  settlement  of  controversies  between  individuals  merely. 
The  Committee  on  the  Judiciary  in  that  Convention  recommended 
a  permanent  increase  in  the  number  of  judges  from  seven  to  nine, 
but  that  proposed  increase  was  defeated  in  the  Convention.  Pro- 
vision was,  however,  made  for  the  temporary  assignment  to  that 
court  by  the  Governor  of  not  more  than  four  Justices  of  the 
Supreme  Court,  and  for  several  years  past  three  justices  have  been 
sitting  under  such  designations.  Those  provisions,  it  was  antici- 
pated, would  enable  that  court  to  keep  abreast  of  its  business. 
There  was  at  the  time  of  the  Convention  of  1894  an  arrearage  of 
about  175  cases  in  the  Court  of  Appeals,  and  it  was  predicted  by 
some  of  the  delegates  in  discussing  the  report  of  the  Judiciary 
Committee,  that  this  number  might  be  increased  to  between  300  or 
400  by  the  time  the  new  Judiciary  Article  became  effective,  viz. : 
January  1,  1896.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  there  is  now  an  accumula- 
tion of  more  than  000  cases  pending  in  the  Court  of  Appeals,  and 
the  average  time  required  between  the  date  of  filing  return  and 
the  cause  being  reached  for  argument,  unless  it  is  entitled  to  a 
preference,  is  about  two  years.  The  Court  has  made  up  no 
calendar  since  May  4,  1914,  and  the  calendar  then  made  up  em- 
braced returns  filed  to  April  20,  1914,  only.  The  number  of  cases 
on  that  calendar  was  714.  During  each  of  the  five  years  ending 
1914  the  Court  has  disposed  of  on  the  average  071  cases,  and 
the  average  number  of  returns  filed  has  been  709,  so  that  each 
year  adds  on  the  average  100  cases  to  the  number  accumulating 
in  the  court.  Your  Committee  agrees  with  the  statement  of 
principle  made  by  the  Judiciary  Committee  in  its  report  to  the 
Constitutional  Convention  of  1894,  in  the  following  language: 

"  Every  State  is  bound  to  give  its  citizens  one  trial  of  their 
controversies  and  one  review  of  the  rulings  and  results  of  the 
trial  by  competent  and  impartial  appellate  tribunal.     When 


9  Doc.  No.  42 

this  is  done,  the  duty  of  the  State  to  particular  litigants  in- 
volved in  a  case  is  fully  performed.  There  is  no  consideration 
either  of  public  duty  or  private  interests  involved  in  litigation 
which  requires  a  second  appeal  and  a  second  review." 

Regarding,  therefore,  the  judicial  function  of  the  Court  of 
Appeals  as  that  of  settling  the  law  for  the  whole  State  and  main- 
taining one  consistent  and  harmonious  system  of  justice,  your 
Committee  reports  provisions:  (1)  designed  to  dispose  without 
further  delay  of  the  present  accumulation  of  business  in  that 
Court,  and  to  enable  it  in  the  future  to  dispose  of  undue  accumula- 
tions as  they  arise;  (2)  further  to  limit  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
court  so  as  to  prevent  the  impairment  of  the  line  of  demarcation 
between  the  general  appellate  courts  and  the  Court  of  Appeals. 
Your  Committee,  therefore,  recommends  that  the  number  of  per- 
manently elected  Judges  be  increased  to  ten,  and  that  the  three 
Justices  of  the  Supreme  Court  at  present  designated  to  sit  as 
Associate  Judges  of  the  Court  of  Appeals  be  continued  as  such 
until  the  expiration  of  their  terms.  For  the  purpose  of  disposing 
of  the  present  accumulation  of  cases,  the  Court  of  Appeals  is 
required  within  three  months  after  the  new  Constitution  takes 
effect,  to  designate,  for  temporary  service,  not  less  than  four  nor 
more  than  six  Justices  of  the  Supreme  Court  to  sit  as  Associate 
Judges  of  the  Court  of  Appeals,  and  thereupon  to  divide  the  Court 
into  two  parts,  distributing  the  permanent  and  temporary  judges 
equally  between  such  parts,  each  of  which  shall  have  jurisdiction 
to  hear  and  dispose  of  the  cases  on  the  calendar  of  the  court,  which 
shall  be  distributed  between  them  by  the  Chief  Judge.  When 
these  accumulations  are  disposed  of  by  reducing  the  number  of 
cases  to  200,  and  not  later  than  December  31,  1017,  the  Supreme 
Court  Justices  are  to  return  to  their  Court,  and  the  Court  of 
Appeals  resumes  its  normal  condition  as  a  single  body.  Experience 
in  the  past  having  demonstrated  that  no  matter  what  provision  is 
made  to  meet  the  increasing  business  of  the  Court  of  Appeals, 
there  is  always  danger  of  undue  accumulations  resulting  in  de- 
lays of  from  one  to  two  years  in  reaching  cases  for  hearing,  the 
Court  is  further  required  to  make  up  a  calendar  at  least  once  in 
every  year,  and  it  is  provided  that  if  on  the  first  day  of  January 
in  any  future  year,  there  shall  be  more  than  500  cases  pending 
undisposed  of  on  its  calendar,  the  Court  shall  again  call  in  the 
Supreme  Court  Justices  and  shall  sit  in  two  parts  and  dispose 


Doc.  No.  42  10 

of  such  accumulations,  and  when  that  is  accomplished,  and  not 
more  than  one  year  later,  the  Justices  shall  again  return  to  the 
Supreme  Court,  and  the  Court  of  Appeals  resume  its  normal  con- 
dition. For  the  purpose  of  enabling  the  Court  to  retain  its  maxi- 
mum strength  at  all  times,  provision  is  further  made  for  calling  in 
Justices  of  the  Supreme  Court  to  take  the  places  of  Judges  of  the 
Court  of  Appeals  temporarily  disqualified  by  absence  or  illness, 
but  for  periods  of  not  exceeding  six  months. 

Your  Committee  recognizes  the  objection  to  dividing  the  Court  of 
Appeals  under  any  circumstances  into  two  parts.  But  unless  the 
Court  shall  be  left  to  struggle  with  its  constantly  increasing  ac- 
cumulation of  cases,  no  alternative  to  that  recommended  presents 
itself,  except  the  creation  of  a  separate  Second  Division  or  Com- 
mission of  Appeals,  which  in  the  past  has  proved  unsatisfactory  to 
the  profession  and  the  public.  The  alternative  recommended  by 
your  Committee  appears  to  it  to  avoid  the  objection  to  such  division 
so  far  as  possible ;  first,  by  assuring  the  temporary  character  of  the 
division,  not  only  by  prescribing  that  it  shall  cease  when  the 
number  of  causes  has  been  reduced  to  a  definite  figure,  but  by 
fixing  the  time  at  the  expiration  of  which  the  temporary  designa- 
tions shall  expire,  this  time  being  estimated  to  be  somewhat  more 
than  should  reasonably  be  required  for  the  two  parts  to  dispose  of 
the  accumulation  of  cases  requiring  the  temporary  expansion  of 
the  Court;  second,  by  providing  that  a  majority  of  the  Judges  in 
each  part  of  the  Court  shall  be  composed  of  members  of  the 
permanent  court,  thus  reducing  the  probability  of  differences  of 
view  resulting  in  a  divergence  of  opinion  to  the  narrowest  bounds 
of  possibility,  and  third,  by  giving  the  Chief  Judge  control  over 
both  parts  of  the  Court  with  power  himself  to  sit  in  either  of  them. 

Your  Committee  recommends  the  following  modification  in  the 
general  prohibition  against  the  Court  of  Appeals  reviewing  facts 
in  any  case,  viz: 

Under  the  provisions  of  section  1317  of  the  Code  of  Civil  Pro- 
cedure, the  Appellate  Division  on  reversing  or  modifying  a  judg- 
ment is  empowered  to  make  new  findings  of  fact  and  render 
judgment  thereon.  In  such  cases,  the  Appellate  Division  in  effect 
acts  as  an  original  trial  court,  and  unless  a  review  is  allowed 
in  the  Court  of  Appeals,  the  litigant  is  deprived  of  the  right, 
conceded  to  all  other  litigants,  of  at  least  one  full  review  upon 
appeal   from   the  judgment  of  the  trial   court.      With   this  ex- 


11  Doc.  No.  42 

ception,  the  present  limitation  of  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Court 
of  Appeals  to  questions  of  law  only  is  retained. 

The  class  of  appeals  which  may  be  taken  as  a  matter  of  right 
is  also  restricted  and  limited  to  the  following  cases  only: 

(1)  Where  the  judgment  is  of  death; 

(2)  From  a  judgment  or  order  entered  upon  a  decision  of  the 
Appellate  Division  which  finally  determines  an  action  or  a  special 
proceeding  directly  involving  the  construction  of  the  Constitution 
of  the  State  or  of  the  United  States,  or  where  one  or  more  of 
the  justices  who  heard  the  case  dissents  from  the  decision 
of  the  court,  or  where  the  judgment  of  the  trial  court  is  reversed 
or  modified ; 

(3)  From  an  order  granting  a  new  trial  where  the  appellant 
stipulates  that  upon  affirmance  judgment  absolute  shall  be 
rendered  against  him. 

The  Court  of  Appeals  is,  however,  empowered  itself  to  allow 
an  appeal  in  any  case  where  a  question  of  law  is  involved  which 
in  its  opinion  ought  to  be  reviewed  by  it;  but  the  power  now 
vested  in  the  Appellate  Division  allowing  such  appeals  is  taken 
away. 

Your  Committee  recommends  one  further  modification  in  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  court.  Previous  to  1894,  the  question  whether 
or  not  there  was  any  evidence  to  support  a  finding  of  fact  or  a 
verdict  was  regarded  as  one  of  law,  but  in  the  Constitution  of 
1894  there  was  inserted  in  Article  VI,  section  9,  a  provision  that 
"  no  unanimous  decision  of  the  Appellate  Division  of  the  Supreme 
Court  that  there  is  evidence  supporting  or  tending  to  support  a 
finding  of  fact  or  a  verdict  not  directed  by  the  court  shall  be 
reviewed  by  the  Court  of  Appeals."  The  testimony  of  almost  all 
of  the  judges  who  appeared  before  your  Committee  is  to  the  effect 
that  the  practical  operations  of  that  provision  have  resulted  un- 
satisfactorily;  the  New  York  State  Bar  Association,  the  New 
York  Association  of  the  Bar,  the  New  York  County  Lawyers 
Association,  and  others,  have  united  in  the  recommendation  that 
this  limitation  be  stricken  from  the  Constitution,  and  your  Com- 
mittee has,  therefore,  so  reported.  Briefly,  it  may  be  stated,  as 
is  done  by  the  Special  Committee  of  the  Association  of  the  Bar  of 
the  City  of  New  York,  that  "  this  provision  has  frequently 
operated  to  preclude  the  review  of  what  is  essentially  a  question  of 
law,  and  it  has  applied  unjustly  to  many  cases  quite  beyond  the 
scope  contemplated  by  its  framers." 


Doc.  No.  42  12 

Surrogates 

In  1913,  the  Legislature  enacted  a  recodification  of  the  law  regu- 
lating the  jurisdiction  and  practice  of  Surrogates  and  Surrogates' 
Courts,  which  vested  them  with  much  greater  jurisdiction  over  the 
administration  of  the  estates  of  decedents  than  theretofore  had  been 
enjoyed  by  them,  including  jurisdiction,  in  their  discretion,  in 
any  proceeding  in  which  a  controverted  question  of  fact  arises  of 
which  any  party  has  a  constitutional  right  of  trial  by  jury,  and 
in  any  proceeding  for  the  probate  of  a  will,  in  which  a  contro- 
verted question  of  fact  may  arise,  either  to  conduct  the  trial  by 
jury  in  the  Surrogate's  Court,  or  to  refer  the  same  to  the  Supreme 
Court  to  be  tried  at  a  trial  term  held  within  the  county  or  in  the 
County  Court  of  the  county.  With  some  hesitation,  your  Com- 
mittee has  reached  the  conclusion  to  continue  the  present  juris- 
diction of  the  Surrogates  as  so  modified,  until  otherwise  "provided 
by  law.  This  will  leave  the  whole  subject  within  the  discretion  of 
the  Legislature,  and  if  experience  shall  demonstrate  the  need  of 
some  modification  of  the  jurisdiction,  the  Legislature  may  act  ac- 
cordingly. 

County  Courts 

The  jurisdiction  of  the  County  Courts  in  actions  at  common 
law  for  the  recovery  of  money  is  increased  from  $2,000  to 
$3,000,  and  they  are  also  given  jurisdiction  over  actions  against 
non-residents  having  an  office  for  the  regular  transaction  of  busi- 
ness within  the  county,  upon  causes  of  action  arising  within  the 
county. 

The  existing  Constitution  prohibits  a  County  Judge  or  Surro- 
gate in  a  county  having  a  population  exceeding  120,000  from 
practicing  as  attorney  or  counselor-at-law  or  acting  as  referee. 
Much  criticism  has  arisen  respecting  the  effect  of  permitting 
■County  Judges  and  Surrogates  in  other  counties  to  practice  law. 
The  opposition  to  making  a  general  prohibition  of  the  prac- 
tice results  from  the  unwillingness  or  inability  of  the  counties  to 
sanction  legislative  increase  in  the  salaries  of  these  officials  to  an 
amount  which  would  compensate  competent  judges.  After  care- 
ful consideration,  your  Committee  recommends  an  extension  of 
the  prohibition  so  as  to  apply  to  all  counties  having  a  population 
of  75,000  or  upwards.  This  will  result  in  extending  it  to  thir- 
teen additional  counties,  all  of  them  prosperous  and  apparently 
abundantly  able  to  adequately  compensate  such  officials  for  the 
loss  of  opportunity  to  add  to  their  salaries  by  private  practice. 


13  Doc.  No.  42 

In  order,  however,  to  make  it  possible  to  secure  competent  men 
for  those  positions,  in  view  of  this  action,  the  Legislature  is  to  bo 
further  empowered  at  any  time  to  consolidate  the  offices  of  County 
Judge  and  Surrogate  in  any  county.  The  compensation  of  the 
County  Judges  is  to  be  directly  fixed  by  the  Boards  of  Supervisors 
of  the  counties,  or  other  officials  exercising  powers  similar  to 
those  now  vested  in  such  boards,  instead  of  through  the  Legisla- 
ture as  at  present,  and  except  in  case  of  such  consolidation,  it  is 
provided  that  the  compensation  of  a  judge  or  justice  of  any  court 
in  the  State,  shall  be  neither  increased  nor  decreased  during  the 
term  of  office  for  which  he  was  elected  or  appointed. 

Commissioners  of  Jurors 

In  conformity  with  the  recommendation  of  a  number  of  judges 
who  have  appeared  before  it,  your  Committee  reports  a  provision 
for  the  appointment  of  Commissioners  of  Jurors  in  all  counties 
having  a  population  of  upwards  of  75,000  inhabitants,  to  be  chosen 
by  the  Justices  of  the  Supreme  Court,  their  terms  of  office  and 
compensation  to  be  fixed  by  the  Legislature,  which  shall  also  pre- 
scribe and  define  their  duties. 

Impeachment 

One  of  the  arguments  employed  by  advocates  of  the  recall  of 
judges  has  been  that  the  proceeding  to  remove  judges  by  impeach- 
ment was  so  cumbersome  as  to  be  impracticable,  and  not  to  afford 
a  feasible  remedy  for  the  removal  of  an  unfit  judge,  save  in  extraor- 
dinary cases  of  political  significance.  For  the  purpose  of  re- 
moving this  argument  and,  without  in  the  slightest  degree  detract- 
ing from  the  dignity  and  importance  of  trial  by  impeachment,  but 
to  make  it  conform  with  the  reasonable  requirements  of  practical 
judicial  procedure,  your  Committee  recommends  a  provision  au- 
thorizing the  Court  for  the  Trial  of  Impeachments  to  order  all  or 
any  part  of  the  testimony  to  be  taken  and  reported  by  a  committee 
composed  of  members  of  the  court,  reserving,  however,  to  the  im- 
peached officer  the  right  to  testify  before  the  court,  if  he  so  desire. 

Court  of  Claims 

To  end  the  recurrent  scandals  resulting  from  the  Legislature 
dealing  with  the  Court  of  Claims  as  a  mere  political  football,  your 
Committee  has  provided  for  the  continuance  of  this  court  as  a  con- 


Doc.  No.  42  14 

stitutional  court.  Two  courses  only  appear  to  be  open  in  dealing 
with  this  matter.  One,  to  transfer  to  the  Supreme  Court  the 
jurisdiction  now  exercised  by  the  present  Court  of  Claims,  the 
other,  to  provide  in  the  Constitution  for  the  continuance  of  that 
tribunal  as  a  court.  The  Court  of  Claims  is  the  development  of 
the  Legislative  Committee  or  Statutory  Board  of  Audit.  Its 
jurisdiction  is  essentially  different  from  that  of  ordinary  courts  of 
justice.  It  should  have  power  to  exercise  this  jurisdiction  in  a 
simple  summary  manner,  without  being  hampered  by  technical 
rules  of  law,  and  your  Committee,  therefore,  recommends  that  it 
be  continued  as  at  present  constituted,  with  power  in  the  Legisla- 
ture to  increase  its  members,  the  judges  to  have  authority 
separately  to  take  testimony  in  any  case,  but  a  majority  of  the 
court  to  concur  in  any  award. 

Consolidation  of  Local  Courts 

Very  greatly  increased  efficiency  has  been  realized  by  the  con- 
solidation of  numerous  small  courts  into  single  tribunals,  so  or- 
ganized that  their  entire  judicial  force  may  be  kept  occupied,  and 
the  business  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  court  fairly  dis- 
tributed among  its  various  terms  and  parts.  Numerous  and  dif- 
ferent plans  of  consolidation  have  been  advocated  before  your 
Committee,  some  even  going  to  the  length  of  urging  the  absorption 
of  all  the  courts  of  the  State  into  one  great  tribunal,  having  orig- 
inal and  appellate  jurisdiction.  Without  yielding  to  such  extreme 
suggestions  as  these,  your  Committee  has  realized  the  force  of  the 
criticism  of  the  unsatisfactory  organization  of  the  courts  of  civil 
and  criminal  jurisdiction  in  the  city  of  New  York,  intermediate 
the  Supreme  Court  and  the  courts  of  inferior  civil  and  criminal 
jurisdiction.  These  latter  courts  recently  have  been  reorganized, 
so  that  the  court  of  limited  civil  jurisdiction,  the  Municipal  Court 
is  vested  with  jurisdiction  throughout  the  Greater  City,  holding 
terms  in  each  of  the  five  boroughs,  its  judges,  under  the  direction 
of  its  Presiding  Judge,  being  authorized  to  sit  wherever  the  busi- 
ness of  the  court  requires,  and  that  business  being  distributed  as 
the  requirements  of  its  due  and  prompt  determination  may  de- 
mand. The  Court  of  Special  Sessions,  and  the  Magistrates'  Courts 
in  the  city  of  New  York,  in  like  manner  have  been  reorganized  with 
jurisdiction  throughout  the  greater  city,  and  with  provisions  for 
the  conduct  of  its  business  similar  to  those  applicable  to  the  Mu- 
nicipal Court.     The  Association  of  the  Bar  of  the  city  of  New 


15  Doc.  No.  42 

York  has  recommended  that  the  Legislature  be  empowered  to 
abolish  County  Courts  within  the  City  of  New  York  and  to  extend 
over  the  whole  city,  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Court  of  General  Ses- 
sions in  and  for  the  city  and  county  of  New  York,  so  far  as  regards 
criminal  jurisdiction,  and  the  jurisdiction  of  the  City  Court  of 
the  city  of  New  York,  so  far  as  regards  civil  jurisdiction.  In  its 
opinion,  such  consolidated  courts  would  relieve  the  Supreme  Court 
of  a  great  number  of  small  cases,  and  would  make  homogeneous 
courts  of  civil  and  criminal  jurisdiction,  respectively,  which  would 
better  meet  the  requirements  of  the  business  in  the  city  of  New 
York  than  the  existing  separate  courts.  Similar  consolidations 
have  been  made  with  very  satisfactory  results  in  other  cities. 
In  conformity  with  those  recommendations,  your  Committee  re- 
ports the  following  provisions : 

From  and  after  January  1,  1917,  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Court 
of  General  Sessions  of  the  City  of  New  York  is  extended  through- 
out the  greater  city.  The  County  Courts  of  Kings,  Queens, 
Richmond  and  Bronx  are  abolished,  and  their  jurisdiction 
transferred  to  the  Court  of  General  Sessions,  the  judges  of  such 
County  Courts  becoming  judges  of  the  Court  of  General  Sessions, 
the  successors  of  the  judges  so  transferred  to  be  elected  by  the 
electors  of  the  counties  in  which  they  respectively  reside.  Owing 
to  the  rapid  growth  of  population  in  Bronx  county,  the  Legislature 
is  empowered  to  provide  one  additional  judge  from  that  county 
if  it  shall  deem  it  proper  so  to  do.  One  of  the  principal  difficul- 
ties in  accomplishing  this  consolidation  lies  in  the  difference  in 
the  salaries  paid  to  the  judges.  Those  of  the  Court  of  General 
Sessions  at  present  receive  salaries  of  $17,500  per  annum,  the 
County  Court  Judges  in  Kings,  Queens  and  Bronx  each  $10,000 
per  annum  and  in  Richmond  $7,500  per  annum.  Your  Com- 
mittee has  provided  that  the  present  incumbents  shall  continue 
to.  receive  those  salaries  until  the  expiration  of  their  respective 
terms,  but  that  their  successors,  who  shall  be  elected  for  periods 
of  fourteen  years,  shall  be  paid  a  salary  to  be  fixed  by  the 
Legislature. 

From  and  after  January  1,  1917,  the  jurisdiction  of  the  City 
Court  of  New  York  is  extended  throughout  the  Greater  City,  and 
the  pecuniary  limit  for  which  it  may  entertain  actions  for  the 
recovery  of  money  increased  to  $5,000.  Provision  is  made  for 
electing  additional  judges  of  the  court,  two  from  the  county  of 
Kings,  and  one  from  each  of  the  counties  of  Bronx  and  Queens. 


Doc.  No.  42  16 

The  Legislature  is  empowered  to  provide  one  additional  judge 
from  Kings  County  should  it  deem  proper  so  to  do.  The  amount 
of  civil  business  in  the  County  Court  of  Richmond  does  not  seem 
sufficient  to  require  provision  to  he  made  for  a  judge  of  the  City 
Court  from  that  county,  but  provision  is  made  for  a  separate 
surrogate  therein. 

Children's  Courts 

To  enable  the  Legislature  to  keep  pace  with  modern  theories 
of  dealing  with  delinquent  children,  not  as  criminals,  but  as  wards 
of  the  State,  and  of  regulating  domestic  relations  on  a  broader 
basis  than  the  mere  enforcement  of  penal  laws,  your  Committee 
has  reported  a  provision  empowering  the  Legislature  to  establish 
inferior  or  local  courts  with  territorial  jurisdiction  throughout  the 
counties  in  which  they  are  situated,  and  to  confer  upon  them,  or 
upon  existing  courts,  power  to  try  without  a  jury  offenses  of  the 
grade  of  misdemeanor,  and  to  establish  children's  courts  and 
courts  of  domestic  relations,  with  jurisdiction  found  to  be  essential 
for  the  successful  administration  of  such  courts. 

Jury  Exemptions 

Exemptions  from  liability  to  jury  service  have  been  granted  by 
the  Legislature  from  time  to  time  to  various  classes  of  citizens.  It 
is  difficult  to  imagine  any  sound  reason  for  the  existence  of  some 
of  these  exemptions.  Many  judges  who  have  appeared  before 
your  Committee  have  attributed  to  these  exemptions  difficulties 
experienced  in  securing  in  important  cases  juries  of  sufficient 
intelligence  to  comprehend  the  issues  involved.  Your  Committee 
is  inclined  to  the  opinion  that  except  in  the  case  of  physicians 
and  surgeons  in  active  practice,  exemptions  from  liability  to  jury 
duty  should  be  limited  to  persons  employed  in  the  public  serv- 
ice; but  recognizing  the  difficulty  of  fairly  determining  this 
question  within  the  limitations  necessarily  imposed  upon  it,  your 
Committee  has  recommended  that  no  others  be  exempt  unless  and 
except  the  judges  empowered  to  make  the  Civil  Practice  rules 
shall  so  provide.  It  is  believed  that  this  body,  charged  with 
formulating  the  rules  governing  procedure  in  the  Courts,  will  be 
better  qualified  to  determine  what  classes  of  persons  may  be  ex- 
empted from  jury  duty  without  impairment  to  the  administration 
of  justice.  Soldiers  and  sailors  of  the  United  States  army  or 
navy,  members  of  the  National  Guard  and  volunteer  firemen  now 


17  Doc.  No.  42 

serving  as  such  or  heretofore  honorably  discharged  are  excepted 
from  this  prohibition. 

Torrens  Law 

The  Committee  has  also  recommended  a  provision  authorizing 
the  enactment  of  laws  to  provide  for  a  system  of  judicial  au- 
thentication and  guaranty  by  the  State  or  by  any  county 
of  titles  to  real  property,  the  determination  of  adverse  claims 
to  and  interests  therein  and  the  establishment  by  means  of  fees 
or  otherwise  of  protective  funds  to  make  such  system  operative, 
and  to  confer  upon  existing  courts  of  record  such  administrative 
powers  as  are  necessary  in  carrying  out  such  system.  The 
advocates  of  the  so-called  Torrens  Law  system  have  pressed  upon 
your  Committee  recommendations  for  the  establishment  of  separate 
land  courts  or  land  divisions  in  the  Supreme  Court  and  provisions 
authorizing  the  Legislature  to  confer  upon  administrative  officers 
judicial  powers  in  carrying  out  this  system.  Your  Committee 
has  felt,  however,  that  no  separate  Land  Division  or  Land  Court 
was  either  necessary  or  desirable,  and  it  is  of  the  opinion  that  it  is 
inexpedient  to  confer  judicial  powers  upon  administrative  officers. 

Your  'Committee  has  adopted  and  included  in  the  article  re- 
ported  portions  of  the  proposed  constitutional  amendments  intro- 
duced by  the  following  named  delegates :  Messrs.  Clearwater, 
Steinbrink,  Aiken,  Rodenbeck,  Baldwin,  R,  B.  Smith,  Cobb, 
Mandeville,  Reeves,  C.  H.  Young,  Tuck,  Sheehan,  Fobes,  Rosch, 
Lincoln,  Heaton,  McKean,  Leggett,  Ostrander,  Coles,  Brenner, 
Barrett,  Dunmore,  Angell,  Wiggins,  Green,  Stimson. 

Your  Committee  gratefully  acknowledges  the  valuable  sugges- 
tions, explanations  and  information  received  from  the  gentlemen 
who  introduced  these  amendments  as  well  as  from  other  proposals 
which  furnished  helpful  suggestions. 

GEORGE  W.  WICKERSHAM, 

Chairman. 

Louis  Marshall,  Adolph   J.   Rodenbeck, 

Albert  F.  Gladding,  A.  T.  Clearwater, 

Henry  L.  Stimson,  William  F.  Sheehan, 

Charles  H.  Young,  D.  Raymond  Cobb, 

Meier  Steinbrink,  Charles  B.  Sears, 

William  N.  Dykman,  Edgar  Truman  Brackett, 
Delancey  ISTicoll,  (with  some  reservations), 

Robert  F.  Wagner,  John  B.  Stanchfield. 


Doc.  No.  42  18 

MINORITY  REPORT 

Mr.  Dunmore  presented  the  following  minority  report: 

With  profound  respect  for  the  judgment  of  the  majority  of 
this  Committee  and  their  report,  I  find  myself  constrained  to 
dissent  from  it,  but  in  one  particular  only,  I  am  in  perfect  accord 
with  all  the  provisions  of  the  majority  report  excepting  the  pro- 
vision containing  the  Court  of  Claims.  While  that  is  called  a 
court,  it  is  made  in  fact  merely  a  board  of  audit.  While  this 
court  annually  passes  upon  greater  property  values  perhaps  than 
is  passed  upon  by  any  like  number  of  judges  of  the  State,  yet  it  is 
limited  to  fixing  the  value  of  the  property,  and  is  denied  juris- 
diction, to  determine  the  value  of  a  small  incumbrance  upon  it. 
While  this  judiciary  article  recognizes  this  court  as  good  enough 
as  between  the  State  and  the  owner  to  pass  upon  the  value  of 
property  worth  perhaps  a  million  of  dollars,  it  is  not  recognized 
as  good  enough  as  between  the  owner  and  a  mortgagee  to  pass 
upon  the  amount  owing  upon  a  mortgage  for  a  hundred  dollars. 
Consequently  after  a  claimant  has  had  his  lawsuit  with  the  State 
he  must  have  another  law  suit  with  the  other  claimants  before 
he  can  get  his  pay  for  property  taken  from  him  by  the  State  with- 
out his  consent,  I  think  the  Court  of  Claims  should  have  juris- 
diction to  determine  the  share  of  several  claimants  in  any  award. 
That  would  avoid  multiplicity  of  actions  and  save  expense  and 
delay  for  claimants. 

Dated  August  12,  1915. 

W.  T.  DUNMORE. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  43 


ADDRESS  OF  PRESIDENT  ELIHU  ROOT,  IN  COM- 
MITTEE OF  THE  WHOLE,  RELATIVE  TO  THE 
PROPOSED  AMENDED  JUDICIARY  ARTICLE 


August  19,  1915 
Mr.  Root  —  Mr.  Chairman. 

The  Chairman  —  Mr.  President. 

Mr.  Root  —  I  want  to  say  a  few  words  which  are  stirred  up  by 
the  appeal  to  memory  by  the  gentleman  from  Saratoga.  But  in  the 
first  instance  I  want  to  suggest  that  if  the  gentleman  from  Sara- 
toga will  not  keep  out  of  the  record  his  references  to  a  break  by 
Brother  Byrne,  that  he  change  his  description  of  the  place  from 
Mount  Ararat  to  Mount  Sinai. 

I  remember  the  conditions  winch  existed  prior  to  the  adoption  of 
the  Short  Civil  Procedure  Act  of  1875,  going  back  a  good  many 
years  before.  I  was  in  the  thick  of  the  controversy  long  before 
Montgomery  Throop  charged  it  in  his  great  tome  which  was  called 
"  The  Code  of  Civil  Procedure,"  and  the  controversy  was  between 
the  old  common-law  practice  and  the  advocates  of  the  reform  pro- 
cedure which  went  all  over  the  country. 

That  reform  was  accomplished  under  the  express  direction  of 
the  Constitution  of  1846. 


Doc.  Xo.  43  2 

I  remember  that  Mr.  Stoughton,  that  able  and  eminent  lawyer, 
never  could  speak  of  the  code,  when  Mr.  Field  was  anywhere  about, 

without  calling  it  "  your  d d  code,  Mr.  Field."     I  remember 

once  being  in  court  in  a  case  in  which  both  Mr.  Field  and  Mr. 
O'Connor  were  engaged,  and  Mr.  Field  put  some  question  during 
the  argument  to  Mr.  O'Connor  as  to  the  effect  of  the  pleadings 
and  O'Connor  turned  on  him  and  said,  "  I  understand,  Mr.  Field, 
that  under  your  code,  the  plaintiff  comes  in  and  tells  his  story  like 
an  old  woman,  and  the  defendant  comes  in  and  tells  his  story  like 
another  old  woman."  That  was  all  he  could  get  out  of  O'Connor 
on  this  question  of  pleading. 

These  were  the  conditions,  and  they  'are  continually  recurring. 

Under  the  old  common  law  system  practice  had  become  so  com- 
plicated and  difficult  that  it  was  hard  for  an  honest  man  to  get  his 
rights.  There  is  a  good  deal  of  human  nature  in  it.  It  has  been 
so  since  the  laws  of  the  Modes  and.  Persians  were  formulated ;  it 
has  been  so  since  the  day  of  Egypt's  power.  Wherever  a  special 
class  of  men  have  been  entrusted  with  the  formulation  and  admin- 
istration of  law,  they  tend  to  make  it  a  mystery;  they  tend  to 
become  more  and  more  subtle  and  refined  in  their  discriminations, 
until  ultimately  they  have  got  out  of  the  field  where  they  can  be 
followed  up  by  plain,  honest  people's  minds,  and  some  power  must 
be  exerted  to  bring  them  back.  The  Constitution  of  1846  exerted 
that  power  to  bring  the  practice  of  the  law  out  of  the  discredit  into 
which  it  had  fallen  because  of  the  intricacy  and  the  complication 
and  the  technicality  and  the  subtlety  of  the  old  common  law 
practice.  Mr.  Field  brought  it  back  with  the  code,  of  three  hun- 
dred and  odd  sections,  which  bears  his  name,  and  the  reform  in 
procedure  went  all  over  the  country.  Curiously  enough,  just  about 
the  time  that  England  followed  the  example  and  adopted  the  re- 
formed procedure  in  her  judicature  act  of  1873,  we  began  to  take 
■a  back  track  and  Mr.  Throop's  attempt  to  condense  in  a  volume 
which  was  called  the  Code  of  Civil  Procedure  a  great  number  of 
particular  and  minute  provisions  regarding  practice  was  the  first 
great  step  in  that  direction,  in  the  backward  direction. 

Now,  in  the  forty  years  which  have  elapsed,  we  have  been  follow- 
ing in  that  same  pathway  until  the  people  of  our  State  have  oome 
f(»  regard  the  simplification  of  practice  as  one  of  the  great  issues 


Doc   X...  43 

of  the  day.  1  believe  there  is  110  duty  which  is  demanded  from  this 
Convention  more  generally  than  the  duty  to  do  something  to  make 
our  practice  more  simple,  speedy,  inexpensive  and  effective.  Why 
is  it?  A  careful  study  of  it  reveals  the  cause,  or  the  principal 
cause.  I  have  listened  to  discussions  and  have  taken  part  in  them 
in  the  Bar  Association  of  my  own  city,  in  the  State  Bar  Associa- 
tion, in  the  American  Bar  Association,  in  countless  conversations 
with  lawyers  and  with  laymen,  and  I  say  the  cause  of  the  prevail- 
ing discontent  with  our  practice  is  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that 
year  by  year  during  all  this  period  of  forty  years,  there  has  been  a 
continual  addition,  step  by  step,  statute  by  statute,  to  the  multi- 
tude of  definite,  certain,  precise  rules  of  procedure,  binding  upon 
the  men  that  sought  redress  of  wrongs  in  the  courts.  One  of  our 
most  honored  and  beloved  judges  in  the  Court  of  Appeals  said  to 
me  the  other  day.  when  T  asked  him  how  he  thought  this  plan 
would  work.  "  I  have  had  since  I  came  here  to  buy  fifteen  editions 
of  the  Code  because  it  is  so  continually  changed  that  after  every 
session  of  the  Legislature  my  last  edition  is  useless,"  and  he  gave 
this  plan  his  warm  approval. 

The  trouble  is  not  in  a  particular  provision.  These  provisions 
that  are  put  in  are  put  in  with  good  intent.  The  men  who  propose 
them  in  the  Legislature  are  honest  men  ;  they  believe  that  they  are 
useful,  but  they  are  not  the  result  of  any  general  view  of  the 
subject.  They  are  the  result  of  particular  views  of  the  needs  of 
particular  cases;  and  a.  provision  that  a  member  of  the  Assembly 
or  the  Senate  may  well  honestly  believe  to  be  useful  upon  his 
experience  in  a  particular  case,  may  work  very  badly,  interfering 
with  the  obtaining  of  justice  in  many  other  different  cases.  And 
when  you  come  to  put  them  all  together,  you  have  a  great  variety 
of  statutory  rights.  Each  one  of  these  is  a  statutory  right :  I 
heard  the  other  day  a  lawyer  in  Xew  York  boast  that  he  could 
postpone  any  litigation  for  seven  years,  and  I  asked  a  lot  of  friends 
as  I  came  along  whether  that  was  true,  and  they  all  said  they 
did  not  doubt  it.  How  ?  Why,  by  compelling  the  honest  fellow 
that  comes  into  court  to  redress  a  wrong  or  to  secure  a  right,  to 
litigate  one  after  the  other  these  statutory  rights  that  have  been 
created  by  the  Legislature.  Courts  cannot  ignore  them  because 
thev  are  rights  G'iven  by  law.     The  courts  must  observe  the  law.  and 


Doe.  JNo.  r.'j  4 

so  the  plain  man  who  wants  to  get  a  wrong  redressed  has.  bristling 
between  his  demand  for  redress  and  his  judgment  a  dozen  litiga- 
tions that  he  has  to  fight  out  before  he  can  get  to  the  end  of  his 
cause. 

My  friends  of  the  Bar,  we  have  been  making  our  system  of  pro- 
cedure here  conform  to  the  subtle,  acute,  highly-trained  ideas  of 
lawyers.  That  is  not  the  true  basis.  The  system  of  procedure,  of 
course,  cannot  be  simple,  but  as  far  as  possible,  it  ought  to  be  made 
to  conform  to  the  plain  man's  intelligence  and  experience.  It 
ought  to  be  so  that  the  farmer  and  the  merchant  and  the  laborer 
can  understand  it,  and  know  why  he  is  delayed  in  getting  his 
rights;  can  understand  that  the  processes  to  which  he  is  subject 
have  a  reason  and  know  what  the  reason  is,  otherwise  you  cannot 
have  that  respect  for  the  law.  that  confidence  in  its  justice  neces- 
sary for  the  maintenance  of  a  system  of  just  administration.  And 
furthermore  the  existence  of  this  great  variety  of  minute,  detailed 
statutory  provisions  has  been  breeding  up  a  great  number  of  code 
lawyers,  and  by  that  I  mean  lawyers  whose  principal  concern  is 
with  the  statutory  code  of  rights  and  not  with  getting  justice  for 
their  clients. 

Xow,  we  ought,  to  get  back,  get  back  to  the  fundamental  idea 
of  our  profession  which  is  the  administration  of  justice.  These 
minute,  particular  Code  provisions  substitute  rules,  multitudes  of 
rules  for  the  justice  of  the  particular  case.  I  agree  with  Mr. 
Brackett.  I  am  old  enough  <at  the  Bar  to  have  the  men  who  were 
my  partners,  my  juniors,  my  clerks,  sitting  on  the  bench,  and 
I  look  at  them  from  a  different  angle  from  that  which  I  can  recall 
forty  or  fifty  years  ago  when  T  looked  up  to  those  men  high  up 
above  —  they  are  men  like  the  rest  of  us.  But.  my  friends,  they 
are  honest  and  just.  They  want  to  do  justice  if  they  can  be  per- 
mitted to.  They  will  do  justice  if  they  are  permitted  to.  This 
network  of  meticulous  rules  that  are  made  by  our  Legislature 
with  honest  purpose  prevent  them  from  doing  justice  in  the  par- 
ticular case;  and  the  people  of  our  State  and  of  our  country  under- 
stand this.  They  may  not  understand  the  details.  They  may 
not  know  why.  but  they  feel  that  the  pathway  of  justice  is  ob- 
structed. They  feel  that  the  honest  man  would  better  lose  his 
claim  than  go  into  court  and  spend  his  time  and  money  in  the  law's 


5  Doc.   No.  4:> 

pursuit  which  seems  to  have  no  end.  And  they  are  indignant 
over  it  and  restless  and  dissatisfied  over  it,  and  they  look  to  us  to 
do  something.  Now,  what  is  it  ?  What  can  we  do  ?  I  can  assure 
you  that  I  have  done  the  best  I  could  for  years  to  try  to  find  some 
formula,  some  method  by  which  the  thing  that  the  'Constitutional 
Convention  of  1846  did  could  be  done  again,  for  by  a  different 
route  we  have  come  into  the  same  condition  with  which  they  dealt 
and  after  most  earnest  thought,  particularly  as  the  result  of  the 
discussions  in  all  these  Bar  Associations,  I  have  not  found  any- 
thing that  offered  so  much  light  as  the  proposal  of  our  Judiciary 
Committee. 

Now,  it  is  not  simple,  but  show  us  something  better.  We  must 
do  something.  We  cannot  go  home  and  say  to  our  friends  and 
neighbors  we  have  given  you  no  relief  in  this  matter  that  concerns 
you  so  deeply. 

Show  us  something  better  than  that.  What  is  it  ?  In  the  first 
place  it  requires  the  Legislature  to  act  upon  this  report  of  the 
Commission  on  statutory  provisions.  It  does  not  say  how  they 
shall  act.     We  don't  undertake  to  interfere  with  them  in  that. 

In  the  second  place,  it  requires  them  to  pass  some  sort  of  a  brief 
civil  practice  act  and  adopt  some  sort  of  rule  of  procedure;  it 
requires  these  two  divisions.  That  is  following  what  our  neigh- 
boring State  of  Connecticut  has  adopted.  They  have  a  practice 
act  that  you  can  fold  up  and  put  in  your  side  pocket.  When  the 
Legislature  in  its  wisdom  has  done  that,  then  two  results  are  pro- 
vided, one  is  that  the  Legislature  shall  stop  the  eternal  tinkering 
with  the  practice,  stop  passing  laws  which  are  brought  in  here  by 
individual  members  upon  a  narrow  view  of  the  occasion  for  them ; 
shall  stop  every  year  pouring  out  a  stream  of  amendments,  and 
making  new  rules  to  cure  the  evils  of  old  rules,  and  shall  confine 
its  action  to  periodical  action  upon  the  report  of  a  commission. 
I  agree  with  the  idea  that  the  Legislature  itself  has  not  the  time 
to  elaborate  and  work  out  a  system.  They  have  got  too  many  other 
things  to  do.  Accordingly  the  practice  has  become  quite  universal 
of  having  commissions  appointed  which  shall  prepare  and  present 
to  the  Legislature  well-considered  measures.  The  Legislature  is 
given  the  fullest  power ;  that  is,  it  retains  the  fullest  power  to 
act  upon  reforms.     It  does  not  have  to  have  the  recommendation 


Doc.  No.  48  6 

of  the  Commission.  When  the  Commission  has  reported,  the 
Legislature  can  throw  their  recommendation  out  the  window  if 
it  sees  fit;  but  the  action  of  the  Legislature  is  concentrated  on 
the  point  where  it  has  the  report  before  it,  so  that  it  will  act  upon 
the  subject  and  not  upon  the  ideas  of  A  to-day  and  B  to-morrow 
and  C  the  day  after,  upon  particular  rules  but  it  will  act  upon  a 
system  of  practice  as  a  whole,  upon  the  report  of  a  commission 
of  its  own  selection,  and  it  will  act  once  for  all  until  another  period 
has  elapsed,  and  so  you  stop  this  meticulous  interference  with 
practice,  and  you  have  an  opportunity  to  test  the  provisions  which 
the  Legislature  adopts  from  time  to  time  on  the  reports  of  its 
commissions.  In  the  meantime  the  courts  are  authorized  to  pro- 
ceed with  their  immemorial  function  of  amending  and  adjusting 
the  rules  subject  to  the  practice  act  of  the  Legislature  so  that  they 
will  contribute  to  the  doing  of  justice  in  the  individual  case  and 
discourage  these  technicalities  and  subtleties  which  tangle  justice 
in  the  net  of  form. 

Now,  there  is  nothing  that  cannot  be  criticised ;  nothing  that 
cannot  be  doubted.  Of  course  the  judges  when  they  come  to  make 
their  rules  may  make  rules  that  Mr.  Wickersham  would  approve 
and  Mr.  Bracket*  would  disapprove,  or  it  may  be  just  the  other 
way.  But  if  the  judges  make  rules  or  amendments  to  the  rules  that 
do  not  on  the  whole  seem  to  be  right,  at  the  next  period,  when  the 
Legislature  takes  the  subject  up.  it  will  put  into  its  practice  act 
a  provision  that  will  control  the  bad  rule.  This  provision  reported 
by  the  Committee  is  highly  meritorious  in  that  it  compels  the 
Legislature  to  act  in  the  broad  way  upon  procedure  as  a  whole. 
and  at  the  same  time  it  enables  the  Legislature  to  control  and 
correct  any  tendencies  by  the  court  to  go  wrong  in  either  direction. 
I  have  seen  and  heard  of  no  ]iroposal  to  accomplish  the  thing  thai 
we  clearly  must  aceomli&h  which  sooins  to  be  so  effective  as  that 
proposed  by  the  Committee. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  44 


REPORT  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  STATE  FINANCES, 
REVENUES  AND  EXPENDITURES,  TRANSMITTING 
PROPOSED  AMENDMENT  No.  815  (Int.  719) 


August   18,   1915 

Mr.  Stimson,  for  the  Committee  on  State  Finances,  Revenues 
and  Expenditures,  makes  the  following  report : 

Your  Committee  presents  herewith  a  bill  which  is  intended 
to  remedy  ahuses  in  the  appropriations  of  public  moneys  for  local 
improvements. 

Section  twenty  of  Article  III  of  the  Constitution  adopted  in 
1821  was  probably  intended  to  apply  to  all  appropriations  made 
for  local  improvements.  The  courts,  however,  have  held  that 
such  acts  are  not  private  or  local  but  public,  "  inasmuch  as  the 
general  improvement  of  the  public  highways  of  the  State,  whether 
canals  or  rivers  that  are  navigable,  is  for  the  benefit  of  the  State 
at  large  though  some  locality  or  some  individuals  may  be  bene- 
fited more  than  others." 

Waterloo  Co.  vs.  Shanahan,  128  N.  Y.  345. 

The  power  of  making  such  improvements  in  the  interest  of  the 
State  at  large  is  clearly  one  which  must  be  retained  by  the  Legis- 


Doc.  No.  44  2 

lature.  The  problem  is  to  guard  against  its  abuse,  and  the  evi- 
dence that  it  is  constantly  abused  is  abundant.  The  debate  on 
the  budget  brought  out  numerous  specific  instances  of  bills  having 
been  passed  where  the  benefit  to  be  derived  by  the  State  from  tin 
use  of  its  moneys  in  the  local  improvement  seemed  extremely 
slender. 

Your  Committee  further  finds  that  it  is  not  uncommon  for  an 
appropriation  to  be  made  and  an  undertaking  begun  without  the 
Legislature  having  in  its  possession  full  or  complete  plans  and 
estimates  of  the  cost  of  the  improvement.  Thereafter  when  it 
turns  out  that  the  improvement  will  cost  very  much  more  than 
the  original  appropriation,  the  fact  that  the  work  has  been  begun 
and  expenditures  already  incurred  is  made  a  reason  for  pro- 
ceeding with  a  work  which  might  never  have  been  undertaken 
had  the  Legislature  known  its  true  cost. 

Your  Committee  has  considered  carefully  the  various  possible 
remedies  to  check  the  evil.  The  methods  suggested  in  the  en- 
closed bill  were  adopted  as  a  regulation  by  the  Senate  Committee 
on  Finance  under  the  Chairmanship  of  Mr.  Higgins,  afterward 
Governor,  and  resulted  in  a  great  diminution  in  the  number  of 
bills.  Some  similar  methods  are  also  in  use  in  the  National 
Congress  in  dealing  with  river  and  harbor  appropriation.  The 
Congress  requires  the  Chief  of  Engineers  to  certify  before  under- 
taking a  given  improvement  that  the  river  in  question  is  worthy 
of  improvement  at  the  expense  of  the  Federal  Government  at 
that  time.  Your  'Committee  believes  that  the  introduction  of  these 
methods  of  ordinary  business  prudence  and  foresight;  to  require 
the  preliminary  formulation  of  plans  and  estimates  and  the 
certificate  of  the  responsible  officer  at  the  head  of  the  department 
which  has  charge  of  State  construction,  will  do  far  more  towards 
checking  excessive  appropriations  of  this  kind  than  the  require- 
ment of  a  two-thirds  vote  in  the  Houses  of  the  Legislature. 

Your  Committee  finds  that  under  the  present  methods  of  the 
Legislature  it  is  very  easy  for  the  two-thirds  vote  to  be  recorded 
without  very  great  care  being  exercised  to  see  that  it  was  actually 
obtained  and  it  finds  further  that  popular  legislators  rarely  have 
any  difficulty  in  obtaining  a  two-thirds  vote,  irrespective  of  party 


3  Doc.  No.  44 

lines.  It  therefore  believes  that  the  protection  suggested  in  the 
accompanying  bill  will  be  much  more  effective  in  obtaining  the 
desired  end  and  will  still  leave  the  Houses  of  the  Legislature 
under  the  control  of  the  majority  required  by  ordinary  parlia- 
mentary procedure. 

Very  respectfully  submitted, 

HENRY  L.  STIMSON, 

Chairman. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN   CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  45 


FINAL   REPORT  OF  THE  NEW  YORK  STATE  CONSTI 
TUTIONAL  CONVENTION  COMMISSION 


August  28,  1915 

Mr.  M.  J.  O'Brien,  from  the  Constitutional  Convention  Com- 
mission, presented  the  following  report : 

To  the  Delegates  of  the  Constitutional  Convention  of  the  State 
of  New  York: 

Gentlemen  : —  The  Constitutional  Convention  Commission  ap- 
pointed pursuant  to  an  act  of  the  Legislature  (Laws  of  1914, 
chapter  261)  to  collect,  compile  and  print  information  and  data 
for  the  Constitutional  Convention  of  1915,  herewith  respectfully 
summits  its  final  report. 

The  first  work  of  the  Commission  was  devoted  to  determining 
the  character  of  the  information  which  would  be  most  useful  to 
the  delegates  and  which  could  be  obtained  within  the  amount 
appropriated  for  the  expenses  of  the  Commission. 

In  its  report  to  the  Convention  under  date  of  May  19th,  1915 
(Document  No.  6  ),  the 'Commission  set  forth  fully  the  ten  publica- 
tions which  it  planned  to  supply  to  the  Delegates,  and  it  is  a 
source  of  satisfaction  to  the  Commission  that  it  is  now  able  to 


Doc.   No.  4.".  2 

report  that   all    these   publications   have  been   completed   and    dis- 
tributed to  the  Delegates  together  with   an   additional   report  on 
"  The  Relation  of  the  State  to  the  City  School  System  "  which  is 
included  in  the  publication  "City  and  County  Government  "- 
"  Special  Topics." 

Of  all  these  publications  one  thousand  copies  were  printed, 
except  Publication  No.  6  which  is  a  complete  text  of  the  New 
York  State  Constitution,  as  amended  to  January  1,  1D15.  contain- 
ing ample  margins,  wide  spaces  between  the  lines  and  alternate 
blank  pages  of  which  publication  only  live  hundred  copies  were 
printed.  After  supplying  the  Delegates  and  those  applying,  who  it 
was  thought  were  entitled  to  copies,  including  one  hundred  and 
twenty  copies  of  Publication  Xo.  8  furnished  the  Westclicster 
County  Research  Bureau,  and  two  hundred  and  fifty  copies  of 
Publication  No.  3  furnished  the  Legislative  Drafting  Research 
Fund  of  Columbia  University,  which  bodies  so  ably  assisted  the 
Commission  in  the  work  of  those  publications,  there  are  now  left 
about  six  hundred  and  fifty  copies  of  most  of  the  publications. 
The  Commission  now  suggests,  subject  bo  the  approval  of  this 
Convention,  that  the  remaining  copie  be  distributed  in  the  fol- 
lowing manner:  First,  to  all  Law  Libraries  and  Public  Libraries 
of  the  cities  of  the  State;  second,  to  all  the  leading  Universities  of 
the  country  and.  third,  the  remaining  copies,  if  any.  to  the  State 
Public  Libraries  throughout  the  United  States.  In  this  way,  the 
valuable  information  contained  in  these  publications  will  be  pre- 
served for  all  time  and  will  always  lie  readily  accessible. 

The  amount  originally  appropriated  for  the  use  of  the  Com- 
mission was  ten  thousand  dollars  to  which  amount  five  thousand 
dollars  was  added  by  subsequent  legislation,  together  with  ten 
thousand  dollars  granted  by  resolution  of  this  Convention,  making 
a  total  of  twenty-five  thousand  dollars  at  the  disposal  of  the  Com- 
mission for  the  expenses  of  its  publications. 

Annexed  hereto  is  a  financial  statement  showing  the  manner  in 
which  the  above  mentioned  amount  has  been  expended.  From 
this  statement  it  will  appear  that  the  Commission  has  kepi  well 
within  the  total  amount  appropriated  and  has  at  presenl  a  balance 
remaining  on  hand.     This  statement  is  respectfully  submitted  to 


3  Doc  No.  45 

this  Convention  for  its  approval,  and  the  Commission  also  requests 
that  the  Convention  authorize  the  distribution  of  the  remaining 
copies  of  the  publications  in  the  manner  heretofore  mentioned. 

The  Commission  takes  this  occasion  to  acknowledge  its  indebted- 
ness to  all  the  individuals,  public  officers  and  bodies  who  have  so 
generously  co-operated  in  furnishing  the  data  and  information 
for  the  various  publications  and,  in  addition  to  the  acknowledg- 
ments made  by  the  Commission,  to  publicly  express  its  apprecia- 
tion of  all  this  invaluable  assistance. 

The  Commission,  therefore,  respectfully  requests  that  the  Con- 
vention adopt  the  resolution  submitted  herewith,  thanking  those 
who  have  contributed  to  the  publications  which  have  been  prepared 
and  supplied  to  the  Delegates  of  this  Convention  and  which  we 
trust  have  been  of  service. 

Respectfully  submitted, 

MORGAN  J.  O'BRIEN, 

Chairman. 

( 'ommission: 

Morgan  J.  O'Brien,  Chairman, 
Robert  F.  Wagner, 
Edward  Schoeneck, 
Thaddeus  C.   Sweet, 
Samson  Lachman, 
John  H.  Finley. 

New  York  State  Constitutional  Convention   Commission. 
Financial  Statement,  August,  1915 

Expenditures  made  from  the  sum  of  $15,000  appropriated  by 
Laws  1914,  chapters  261  and  530,  and  by  Laws  1915,  chapter 
201,  for  material  relating  to  the  State  in  general. 
Publication  No.  1 

Lincoln's    Constitutional    History,    181    sets    at 

$9.50  per  set $1,717  50 

Publication  No.  2 

New  York  State  Constitution  Annotated,  Parts 
I  and  II 

Printing  1,000  copies 1,051   50 


Doc.  No.  45  4 

Printing  250  extra  copies  of  Part  II $62  50 

Binding    250    extra   copies   of   Part   II    in 

paper  covers 5  00 

Wrapping  and  mailing  Part  II 15   00 

Binding  1,000  copies,  Parts  I  and  II,   to- 
gether in  black  imitation  flexible  leather.  .  300  00 

Publication  No.  3 

Subject  Index  Digest  of  State  Constitutions 

Legislative  Drafting  Kesearch  Fund.  .....  1,000  00 

Printing  1,000  copies 3,205  50 

Binding   1,000   copies  in  imitation  flexible 

leather 300  00 

30  sets  of  galley  proof 120  00 

Publication  No.  4 

Government  of  the  State  of  New  York 

Binding    300    copies    in    imitation    flexible 

leather 51  00 

Printing  and  binding  700  additional  copies.  700  00 

Publication  No  5 

Revision  of  the  State  Constitution 

Academy  of  Political  Science 1,000  00 

Binding    150    copies.    Parts    I    and    II    to- 
gether in  paper  covers. 22   50 

Binding  850  copies,   Parts  I   and  II  sepa- 
rately in  flexible  leather 5  10  00 

Boxing  300  sets  of  Publications  Nos.  4  and  5 

and  delivering   1  T <  >  sets 64  00 

Publication  No.  6 

Interleaved  State  Constitution 

Printing  500  copies,  binding  200  copies  in 

flexible  leather  and  L 50' copies  in  paper. .  600  00 

Publication  No.  9 

Constitution    and    Government    of    the    State   of 
New  York  —An  Appraisal 

Bureau  of  Municipal  Research 733  85 


5  Doc.  No.  45 

Printing  title  page,  letter  of  transmittal  and 

binding  100  copies  in  flexible  leather.  .  .  .  $308  84 

Proportionate  share  of  secretary's  salary.  •  •  720  00 

Expended  under  secretary's  direction  for 
preparation  of  copy  for  Publications  Nos. 
2  and  6,  proof-reading,  etc.,  stenographic 
and  typewriting  work,  clerical  work  in 
connection     with    secretary's    office,     and 

stamps 1,317  34 

J.  B.  Lyon  Co.  for  printing  stationery,  cir- 
cular letters,  etc 85  77 

Thorpe's  Constitutions,  etc.,  5  sets 10  50 

Newspaper  clippings 15  00 

Dougherty's     Constitutional     History,      10 

copies 25  00 

Secretary's  future  expenses  (estimated)  ....  50  00 

Future  transportation  charges  for  delivering 

publications  (estimated) .  400  00 


Total $14,482  80 


Expenditures  made  from  the  sum  of  $10,000  appropriated  by 
Laws  1915,  chapter  024,  for  material  relating  to  city  and  county 
government. 

Publication  No.  7 

Government  of  the  City  of  New  York 

Academy  of  Political  Science $750  00 

Binding  1,000  copies 300  00 

Publication  No.  8 

County  Government  of  New  York 

Printing  1,000  copies 2,359  43 

Binding  1,000  copies  in  flexible  leather 300  00 

Publication  No.  10 

City  and  County  Government 
1 .   Monroe  County 

Printing  1,200  copies 156   14 

Printing  200'  copies  in  paper 2  00 


Doc.  No.  45  6 

2  .    City  of  Rochester 

Printing-  1,200  copies $278  55 

Binding  200  copies  in  paper 2  00 

3 .  Nassau  County 

Printing  1,200  copies 263  30 

Binding  200  copies  in  paper 2  00 

4.  Relation  of  State  to  City  School  System 

Printing  1,200  copies 212  51 

Binding  200  copies  in  paper. 2  00 

Binding  1,000  copies  of  above  4  pamphlets 

in  flexible  leather  and  printing  title  page  303  56 
Proof  reading  on  city  and  county  publica- 
tions    29  25 

Proportionate  share  of  secretary's  salary.  .  480  00 

J.  B.  Lyon  Co.,  boxing  and  handling  1,000 
copies  of  Government  of  City  of  New 
York 60  00 

Bureau  of  Municipal  Research 

Cost  of  services  in  connection  with  the  prep-  . 
aration    of    the   report    on    the    Organiza- 
tion and  Functions  of  the  Government  of 
the  City  of  New  York 2,111   11 

Cost  of  services  in  connection  with  the  prep- 
aration of  the  report  on  the  Revenues 
and  Expenditures  of  the  Government  of 
the  City  of  New  York  for  the  five  years, 
1910-1914 1,363  11 


Total $8,97:.   62 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN   CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  46 


MINORITY  REPORT  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  LEGIS- 
LATIVE ORGANIZATION,  RELATIVE  TO  PROPOSED 
AMENDMENT  NO.  836  (INT.  NO.  722) 


August  28,  1915 

Mr.  Burkan  presented  the  following  minority  report  on  Pro- 
posed amendment  No.  836  (Int.  No.  722). 

To  the  Convention: 

The  undersigned  respectfully  dissent  from  the  report  of  the 
majority  recommending  the  adoption,  among  others,  in  Article 
III,  Section  4,  of  the  following  provisions,  to  wit :  "  No  county 
shall  have  more  than  one-third  of  all  the  Senators,  and  no  coun- 
ties as  now  organized  wholly  contained  within  the  limits  of  a 
single  city,  shall  have  more  than  one-half  of  all  the  Senators." 

This  proposal  extends  the  existing  limitations  upon  the  legis- 
lative representation  of  hut  two  adjoining  counties  to  all  the  coun- 
ties embraced  within  a  city. 

The  object  sought  to  be  accomplished  by  this  proposal  is  to 
limit  the  representation  of  the  city  of  New  York  in  the  Senate 
to  not  more  than  one-half  of  all  the  Senators,  however  large  and 


Doc.  No.  46  2 

increasing  its  population,  and  without  regard  to  the  number  of 
counties  within  its  boundaries.  While  New  York  city  is  not 
definitely  named  in  the  proposal,  obviously  it  can  only  apply  to  the 
city  of  New  York,  as  there  is  no  other  city  which,  within  the  next 
twenty  years,  is  likely  to  come  within  its  purview.  The  proposal 
denies  to  the  people  of  the  city  of  New  York  their  rightful  repre- 
sentation in  the  State  government ;  it  deprives  them  of  an  equality 
of  representation  in  the  Legislature.  The  practical  operation  of 
these  provisions  requires  that  every  Senator  in  New  York  city 
shall  represent  a  much  larger  population  than  the  average  of  Sena- 
tors from  other  sections  of  the  State,  for  they  prevent  the  city  of 
New  York,  regardless  of  population,  from  electing  a  majority  of 
the  State  Legislature.  Thus  a  minority  of  the  electorate  of  the 
State  controls  the  State  government,  dominates  its  policies  and  is 
enabled  to  enact  oppressive  legislation  affecting  even  the  purely 
local  affairs  of  the  city.  The  reasons  advanced  for  the  extension 
of  the  limitation  are  that  it  will  prevent  the  city  with  its  pre- 
ponderance in  population  from  dominating  the  entire  state,  con- 
trolling State  affairs  and  committing  sectional  oppression.  We 
are  persuaded  that  the  proposal  is  inspired  rather  by  a  partisan 
desire  to  continue  the  control  of  the  Legislature  in  the  hands  of 
the  political  party  dominant  in  the  rural  sections  of  the  State,  and 
to  perpetuate  the  present  oppressive  control  and  interference  in 
matters  purely  of  local  city  concern. 

It  was  suggested  in  the  debate  before  the  Convention  on  the 
proposal  to  strike  out  the  present  limitation  of  New  York  city 
representation  in  the  Legislature  that  the  grievance  of  the  city 
against  legislative  dominance  and  interference  in  local  concerns 
would  be  corrected  by  complete,  full  and  adequate  "  Home  Rule  ". 

The  "  Home  Rule  "  article  advanced  to  third  reading  signally 
fails  to  accomplish  this  object.  The  provision  of  the  "  Home 
Rule"  article  permitting  the  Legislature  by  joint  resolution  t>> 
nullify  any  charter  or  important  amendment  thereto  adopted  by 
the  city,  throws  the  most  important  local  problems  of  the  city 
into  the  mill  of  State  politics. 

Respectfully  submitted, 
(Signed)  A.  E.  SMITH, 

NATHAN  BTTRKAN. 
Dated  August  27,  1915. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  47 


REPORT  OF  COMMITTEE  ON  CIVIL  SERVICE  RELATIVE 
TO  THE  SEVERAL   PROPOSED    AMENDMENTS 


August  31,  1915 

Mr.  Rhees  from  the  Committee  on  Civil  Service  presented  the 
following  report: 

REPORT  OF  COMMITTEE  ON  CIVIL  SERVICE 

The  Committee  on  Civil  Service  to  which  the  following  Pro- 
posed constitutional  amendments  were  referred,  to  wit: 

Introductory  No.  29,  introduced  by  Mr.  Olcott. 
Introductory  No.  53,  introduced  by  Mr.  Dunmore. 
Introductory  No.  77,  introduced  by  Mr.  Phillips. 
Introductory  No.  136,  introduced  by  Mr.  Unger. 
Introductory  No.  138,  introduced  by  Mr.  Quigg. 
Introductory  No.  142,  introduced  by  Mr.   Steinbrink   (by  re- 
quest). 

Introductory  No.  237,  introduced  by  Mr.  Donovan. 
Introductory  No.  263,  introduced  by  Mr.  Heyman. 
Introductory  No.  281,  introduced  by  Mr.  Adams. 
Introductory  No.  284,  introduced  by  Mr.  Mann. 
Introductory  No.  351,  introduced  by  Mr.  Wood. 
Introductory  No.  427,  introduced  by  Mr.  C.  Nicoll. 
Introductory  No.  508,  introduced  by  Mr.  Quigg. 


Doc.  No.  47  2 

Introductory  No.  528,  introduced  by  Mr.  Steinbrink  (by  re- 
quest). 

Introductory  No.  614,  introduced  by  Mr.  Weed. 
Introductory  No.  641,  introduced  by  Mr.  McKean  (by  request). 
Introductory  No.  642,  introduced  by  Mr.  McKean  (by  request). 
Introductory  No.  657,  introduced  by  Mr.  Rhees  (by  request). 
Introductory  No.  658,  introduced  by  Mr.  Rhees  (by  request). 

report  adversely  upon  the  same. 

The  committee  has  held  public  hearings  on  the  different  pro- 
posals submitted  and  listened  also  to  several  State  and  municipal 
officials  of  extensive  experience  in  the  administration  of  the  civii 
service.  The  committee  has  also  received  many  letters  and  volu- 
minous petitions  both  in  favor  of  and  in  opposition  to  the  various 
proposals  referred  to  and  has  formed  its  conclusion  after  extended 
and  careful  consideration. 

.  The  proposals  submitted  to  the  committee  advocate  the  extension 
of  civil  service  preference  either  in  appointment,  or  in  promotion, 
or  retention,  or  in  all  of  these,  to  veterans  of  the  Spanish  American 
War,  to  all  honorably  discharged  soldiers,  sailors  and  marines  of 
the  Army  and  Navy  of  the  United  States  who  enlisted  from  this 
State,  to  honorably  discharged  members  of  the  National  Guard 
and  Naval  Militia  of  this  State,  to  exempt  volunteer  firemen,  to 
all  employees  in  the  classified  service  of  ten  years  experience  in  the 
employment  of  the  State ;  and  the  extension  to  all  civil  servants 
of  the  right  of  trial  and  court  review  before  removal  from  the 
service. 

The  information  submitted  to  the  committee  indicates  that 
there  are  at  present  over  fifteen  thousand  employees  in  the  classi- 
fied service  of  the  State  and  in  addition  about  fifty-three  thousand 
in  the  civil  divisions  thereof,  a  total  of  sixty-eight  thousand 
places  in  the  classified  civil  service.  We  are  informed  that  there 
are  some  twenty-five  thousand  Spanish  War  veterans  resident  in 
the  State,  that  there  are  approximately  two  hundred  thousand 
volunteer  firemen,  that  there  are  about  thirty  thousand  honorably 
discharged  members  of  the  National  Guard  and  Naval  Militia  in 
the  State.  Concerning  the  number  of  soldiers,  sailors  and  ma- 
rines honorably  discharged  from  the  Army  and  Navy  of  the 
United  States  who  reside  in  this  State  we  have  no  information. 
These  proposed  preferred  groups  are  nearly  four  times  as  many 
in  number  as  there  are  places  in  the  classified  public  service. 


3  Doc.  No.  47 

Against  the  granting  of  any  such  preference  in  the  civil  service 
we  have  received  strong  protests  from  many  heads  of  departments 
in  the  State  government  and  from  mayors  and  department  heads 
of  many  of  the  cities  of  the  State,  as  well  as  from  superintendents 
of  State  and  municipal  institutions.  All  these  men  have  had  ex- 
perience in  making  appointments  in  the  civil  service,  some  of  them 
for  many  years.  With  one  voice  they  protest  that  preference  for 
special  classes  works  disaster  to  the  morals,  the  discipline  and  the 
efficiency  of  the  office  for  which  they  are  responsible. 

These  facts  have  convinced  the  majority  of  your  committee  that 
no  change  should  be  recommended  in  the  present  form  of  the  civil 
service  section  of  the  Constitution. 

The  dissatisfaction  with  the  existing  provisions  which  prevails 
in  the  minds  of  some  advocates  of  a  more  thorough  application 
of  the  merit  system  in  the  civil  service,  is  due  we  believe  to  failures 
in  administration,  not  to  inadequacy  of  the  constitutional  mandate. 

To  insure  a  clearer  recognition  of  the  need  for  consistent  and 
faithful  administration  of  the  laws  enacted  to  enforce  that  man- 
date of  the  Constitution,  your  committee  has  recommended  that 
the  Civil  Service  Commission  be  made  a  constitutional  department 
of  government,  and  the  recommendation  has  been  incorporated  in 
the  amendment  proposed  by  the  Committee  on  Governor  and 
other  State  officers. 

The  committee  has  been  actuated  throughout  by  a  strong  desire 
to  reinforce  the  merit  system  in  the  administration  of  the  civil 
service.  That  desire  has  led  us  after  careful  consideration  of  all 
proposals  to  report  adversely  to  any  change  in  the  broad  and  com- 
prehensive language  of  section  nine  of  Article  V. 
Respectfully  submitted, 

(Signed)         RUSH  RHEES, 

SAMUEL  K.  PHILLIPS. 
GEO.  W.  WICKERSHAM, 
CHARLES  M.  DOW, 
JAMES  L.  NIXON, 
HOMER  E.  A.  DICK, 
ANDREW  P.  McKEAN, 
E.  CLARENCE  AIKEN, 
FRANCIS  A.  WINSLOW. 


Doc.  No.  47  4 

The  unanimous  testimony  presented  to  the  committee  by  heads 
of  State  and  city  departments  was  to  the  effect  that  any  further 
exemptions  from  the  civil  provisions  of  the  Constitution  would 
be  detrimental  to  the  efficiency  of  the  civil  service. 

For  that  reason  I  am  compelled  to  unite  in  the  recommendation 
of  the  committee  that  no  amendment  should  be  made  to  section 
nine  of  Article  V  of  the  Constitution. 

(Signed)  ISRAEL  T.  DEYO. 


In  my  opinion  the  Constitution  should  contain  provision  for  the 
continuance  of  the  merit  system,  but  should  be  free  from  any 
reference  to  preferences,  leaving  such  matters  entirely  to  legisla- 
tive enactment.  I  am  personally  in  favor  of  granting  to  war 
veterans  preference  in  appointment  only,  but  such  preference 
should  be  extended  only  to  those  whose  marks  upon  civil  service 
examination  are  above  a  certain  minimum,  which  minimum  should 
be  higher  than  the  minimum  required  for  passing  the  examination. 
In  other  words,  if  the  minimum  percentage  requisite  to  admission 
to  the  civil  service  list  is  75  per  cent.,  any  veteran  who  has  re- 
ceived for  example,  85  per  cent,  or  more,  shall  be  preferred  in 
appointment  over  all  others,  even  though  such  others  may  have 
received  a  higher  standing.  There  is  no  reason  why  public  offices 
should  be  filled  by  those  whose  attainments  are  mediocre  and  it 
would  be  far  better  for  the  State  to  adopt  a  system  of  pensions 
than  to  have  its  work  poorly  done  by  incompetent  public  servants. 
Probably  it  would  be  cheaper  in  the  end.  However,  by  adopting 
a  rule  which  would  raise  the  standard  as  above  specified,  so  far  as 
veterans  are  concerned,  a  method  of  reward  would  be  achieved 
without  an  impairment  of  the  civil  service.  This,  however,  should 
not  be  included  in  any  constitutional  enactment  but  left  to  the 
Legislature,  and  I  therefore  concur  in  the  finding  of  the  majority 
of  the  Committee. 

(Signed)     MARK  ETSNER. 


5  Doc.  No.  47 

Mr.  Mann  presented  the  following  minority  report : 

With  a  great  respect  for  the  judgment  of  the  majority  of  the 
Committee  on  Civil  Service,  and  a  proper  regard  for  its  opinion, 
the  undersigned,  a  minority  of  the  Committee  on  Civil  Service, 
find  themselves  nnable  to  agree  in  all  respects  with  such  majority, 
and  present,  as  a  minority  report,  the  following: 

I.  We  believe  that  there  is  no  reason  in  logic  or  justice  why  there 
should  not  be  accorded  to  the  Spanish-American  War  Veterans, 
if  not  the  same,  certainly  some  of  the  privileges  given  to  veterans 
of  the  Civil  War.  The  patriotic  motives  of  those  who  enlisted 
in  the  Union  army  in  the  Civil  War  inspired  those  who  enlisted 
in  the  Spanish-American  War.  In  our  judgment,  the  efficiency 
of  the  Civil  Service  would  be  strengthened  by  the  training  which 
a  military  experience  necessarily  gives ;  and  a  recognition  of 
patriotic  sacrifice  will  go  far  toward  providing  an  incentive  for 
similar  service  on  the  part  of  the  youth  of  our  land,  should  the 
emergency  arise. 

We,  therefore,  urge  the  passage  of  amendment,  Printed  No. 
630,  Int.  No.  614,  hereto  annexed. 

FRANK  MANN, 
JOHN  W.  WEED, 
W.  T.  DUNMORE. 


II.  In  addition  to  the  foregoing,  we  submit  that  to  make  the 
Civil  Service,  in  fact  (as  well  as  in  theory)  one  of  merit  and 
fitness,  no  loophole  should  exist  for  political  advantage  or  unjust 
preferment  therein.  The  Legislature  should  have  power  to  enact 
laws  compelling  the  appointment  of  the  candidate  who  procures 
the  highest  standing  in  competitive  examinations,  which  power 
is  denied  to  it  in  the  case  of  People,  etc.,  v.  Mosher,  163  N.  Y. 
32.  Else  the  Civil  Service  Article  may  be  made  to  defeat  its 
very  purpose,  which  purpose  is  the  substitution  of  merit  for 
political  availability,  and  of  fitness  for  nepotism.  So,  too,  pro- 
vision should  be  made  fully  to  protect  Civil  Service  employees 


Doc.  No.  47  6 

from  arbitrary  removal,  or  the  political  change  of  competitive 
positions  to  the  exempt  class. 

III.  The  Civil  Service  of  the  State  should,  so  far  as  practi- 
cable, be  from  among-  residents  of  the  State,  "  New  York  for 
New  Yorkers  "  is  a  maxim  that  can  find  its  best  application  in 
the  Civil  Service.  We  know  of  no  reason  why  the  State  or 
municipality  should  be  permitted  to  support  a  horde  of  foreign 
dependents  who  draw  salaries  from  the  State  of  New  York  to 
expend  such  salaries  in  the  development  of  other  States.  It  is 
unjust  and  uneconomical  that  our  already  overburdened  taxpay- 
ers should  indirectly  be  compelled  to  contribute  to  the  revenues 
of  such  other  states.  It  is  difficult  enough,  in  these  times  of 
fiscal  stress,  to  meet  the  exactions  of  our  own  Excelsior  State 
extravagance.  Besides,  it  must  be  patent  that  a  Civil  Service 
employee  will  be  most  efficient  in  the  service  of  his  home  State, 
the  welfare  of  which  is  a  vital  financial  and  social  concern  to 
him  and  his. 

Therefore,  We  additionally  recommend  that  (a)  provisions  be 
made  permitting  the  Legislature  to  compel  the  appointment  of 
the  fittest  candidate;  (b)  that  safeguards  be  thrown  about  Civil 
Service  employees  to  save  them  from  unjust  removal  or  "  ripper  " 
legislation;  and  (c)  a  preference  be  given  to  residents  of  this 
State  in  appointment  and  promotion ;  or  should  that  be  inex- 
pedient, that  only  residents  of  the  State  be  employed  in  its  Civil 
Service. 

ALBEET  BLOGG  UNGER, 
EUGENE  LAMB  RICHARDS. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  48 


MINORITY  REPORT  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  BILL  OF 
RIGHTS  RELATIVE  TO  PROPOSED  AMENDMENT 
TO  ARTICLE  I,  SECTION  5 


September  1,  1915 
Mr.  Reeves  reported  the  following: 

The  undersigned,  members  of  the  Committee  on  Bill  of  Rights, 
respectfully  submit  the  following  minority  report  to  the  amend- 
ment proposed  by  that  Committee  to  Article  one,  Section  five, 
which  proposed  amendment  reads  as  follows :  "  On  a  conviction 
for  a  crime  now  punishable  by  death,  the  jury  may  by  its  verdict 
impose  either  the  death  penalty  or  life  imprisonment  and,  in 
the  latter  event,  no  pardon  cr  commutation  shall  be  granted  un- 
less the  innocence  of  the  person  convicted  be  established."  In 
our  opinion,  no  change  should  be  made  in  the  Constitution  on 
this  subject  for  the  following  reasons  among  others : 

(1)  The  matter  is  purely  legislative  and  not  constitutional. 
If  the  proposed  amendment  were  placed  in  our  fundamental  law 
for  the  next  twenty  years  and  found  to  be  detrimental  to  the  peo- 
ple of  the  state,  it  would  become  a  great  calamity.  The  states 
of  this  country  have  not,  generally,  dealt  with  this  subject  in 
their  constitutions. 


Doc.  No.  48  2 

(2)  There  is  no  apparent  demand  for  such  a  change.  The 
general  feeling,  as  we  understand  it,  is  that  the  administration  of 
the  criminal  law  should  be  strengthened  wherever  possible  and 
not  weakened  by  provisions  which  might  encourage  crime. 

(3)  The  proposed  amendment  involves  a  rule  of  men  and  not 
of  law.  It  would  not  be  fair  to  juries  to  place  upon  them  a 
responsibility  which  fairly  and  logically  belongs  to  the  state. 
The  jury  should  determine  the  guilt,  but  the  state,  by  its,,  law, 
should  fix  the  punishment.  The  reverse  of  this  will  cause  dis- 
cord in  the  jury  room  and  lead  to  many  disagreements  that  other- 
wise would  not  occur  and  will  cause  a  lack  of  uniformity  in 
punishment. 

(4)  The  proposed  amendment  is,  in  effect,  an  attempt  to 
abolish  capital  punishment;  for  few,  if  any,  juries  will  inflict  the 
death  penalty  if  they  can  avoid  the  responsibility. 

(5)  The  City  of  Greater  New  York,  with  its  varied  and 
rapidly  changing  population,  is  the  last  place  in  the  world  in 
which  to  try  such  an  experiment. 

(6)  We  believe  that  a  certain  death  penalty  is  the  greatest 
deterrent  against  murder  and  that  it  is  the  duty  of  this  Conven- 
tion to  conserve  the  safety  of  those  who  otherwise  might  be 
victims  of  that  crime.  If  the  retention  of  the  death  penalty 
will  cause  the  murders  in  this  state  to  be  any  less  in  number  than 
they  otherwise  would  be,  it  should  be  retained.  The  practically 
unanimous  testimony  of  those  who  are  charged  with  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  criminal  law  is  that,  in  their  opinion,  this  retention 
would  have  that  effect. 

Dated,  Albany,  N.  Y.,  August  — ,  1915. 

Respectfully  submitted, 

MORGAN  .1.   O'BRIEN, 
J.  G.  SCHURMAN, 
GEOEGE  A.   BUNCE, 
ALFRED  G.  REEVES, 
FRANCIS    MARTIN. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN   CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  49 


REPORT  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON  MILITIA  AND 
MILITARY  AFFAIRS,  RELATIVE  TO  THE  SEVERAL 
PROPOSED  AMENDMENTS 


►September  '2,  1915 

Mr.  Latson,  from  the  Committee  on  Militia  and  Military 
Affairs,  presented  the  following  report: 

Your  Committee  on  Militia  and  Military  Affairs  has  retained 
under  consideration  several  proposed  amendments  and  begs  to 
submit  this,  its  final  report. 

Printed  No.  200,  by  Mr.  Herman. 

Printed  No.  480,  by  Mr.  C.  Nicoll. 

The  purpose  of  these  bills  was  to  accord  certain  Civil  Service 
recognition  to  members  of  the  "National  Guard,  who  had  received 
or  might  be  entitled  to  receive  a  full  and  honorable  discharge. 
Your  Committee  favor  this  proposition,  and  it  has  been  com- 
mended by  all  commanding  officers  of  the  National  Guard  who 
appeared  before  your  Committee.  The  prevailing  opinion  has 
been,  however,  to  the  effect  that  while  such  a  measure  would  be 


Doc.  No.  49  2 

meritorious  and  just,  it  is  a  matter  more  properly  for  considera- 
tion by  the  Legislature  than  for  Constitutional  enactment. 
Printed  No.  675,  by  Mr.  Tuck. 

This  proposed  amendment  contemplates  compulsory  military 
service.  There  has  been  a  strong  desire  on  the  part  of  your  Com- 
mittee to  devise  and  offer  some  affirmative  suggestion  designed  to 
awaken  a  greater  interest  in  military  matters  and  to  impress  upon 
our  community  the  necessity  now  so  earnestly  urged  upon  us 
from  many  quarters. 

For  example,  it  has  been  suggested  that  all  males  between  the 
ages  of  eighteen  and  twenty-one,  who  receive  scholarships  from 
the  Department  of  Education,  should,  in  return,  obligate  them- 
selves to  devote  an  appropriate  share  of  their  time  to  military 
training. 

Again,  it  has  been  suggested  that  in  our  Educational  Article, 
a  provision  might  wisely  be  inserted  to  the  effect  that  our  system 
of  public  education  include  some  teaching  in  military  science. 
This  would  have  a  marked  effect  upon  the  coming  generation 
and,  if  carried  into  our  evening  schools,  its  influence  would  be 
felt  upon  many  now  available  for  military  service. 

All    such    suggestions,    however,    including    the    provision    for 
compulsory    military    service    would    seem    properly    within    the 
scope  of  legislation  and  it  has  been  deemed  unwise  to  embody  any 
such  mandatory  provisions  in  the  Constitution. 
Printed  No.  452,  by  Mr.   Coles. 
Printed  No.   544,  by  Mr.  Bayes. 

Vonr  Committee  has  been  very  earnestly  requested  to  report 
one  or  the  other  of  these  proposed  amendments,  particularly  in 
view  of  the  fact  that  provisions  of  a  similar  nature  are  to  be 
found  in  former  Constitutions  of  this  State. 

Vonr  Committee  direct  attention  to  the  language  of  our  present 
Constitution  on  this  subject  which  recognizes  "such  exemptions 
as  are  now  or  may  be  hereafter  created.by  the  laws  of  the  United 
States  or  by  the  Legislature  of  this  State."  The  Military  Law 
of  lli is  State  specifically  prescribes  that  all  persons  exempt  from 


3  Doc.  No.  40 

military  service  under  the  laws  of  the  United  States  shall  be 
exempt  in  this  State.  Congress  has  declared  an  express  exemp- 
tion in  this  regard  by  the  Act  of  January  21,'  1903.  The  exemp- 
tion there  provided,  thus  controls  both  the  State  Constitution 
and  the  State  Military  Law. 

Those  proposed  amendments  have  been  under  consideration  by 
the  Committee  on  Bill  of  Rights,  as  well  as  by  your  Committee 
on  Militia  and  Military  Affairs.  Both  Committees  recognize  and 
approve  the  underlying  principle  of  religious  toleration  for  which 
these  amendments  stand,  but  regard  their  enactment  as  unneces- 
sary in  view  of  the  existing  provisions  of  Constitutional  and 
Statute  Law  above  quoted. 

Printed  No.  485,  by  Mr.  Curran. 

This  bill  has  likewise  been  under  consideration  jointly  by  your 
Committee  on  Militia  and  Military  Affairs,  and  your  Committee 
on  Bill  of  Rights  A  difference  of  opinion  has  developed. 
While  the  Committee  on  Bill  of  Rights  have  reported  this 
measure  favorably  with  a  slight  change  in  phraseology,  your 
Committee  on  Militia  and  Military  Affairs  disapprove  the  same. 
There  are  many  civilians  employed  to  accompany  a  military 
force.  All  such  civilians  are  subject  to  Articles  of  War  and 
regulations  governing  the  military  forces.  They  are  triable  by 
Courts  Martial.  To  deny  Military  Courts  this  jurisdiction  would 
substantially  destroy  discipline.  This  is  true  with  reference  to 
civilian  teamsters,  civilian  clerks,  civilian  mechanics,  civilian 
farriers,  civilian  hostlers  and  many  others  who  are  as  much  a 
part  of  the  military  force  for  the  purpose  of  its  mission  as  are 
the  officers  and  soldiers  who  constitute  its  military  personnel. 
There  are  many  military  offenses  which  do  not  constitute  a  crime 
under  the  provisions  of  our  penal  law,  and  it  would  be  difficult 
to  determine  how  such  offenses  could  be  dealt  with,  if  the  juris- 
diction of  disciplinary  courts  were  removed. 
Respectfully  submitted, 

ALMET  R.  LATSOJST, 

Chairman. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN   CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.   50 


ADDRESS  OF  PRESIDENT  ELIHU  ROOT  IN  THE 
COMMITTEE  OF  THE  WHOLE  ON  THE  SHORT 
BALLOT  AMENDMENT 


August  30,  1915. 
Mr.  Root  —  Mr.  Chairman. 

The  Chairman  —  Mr.  Root. 

Mr.  Root  —  I  have  had  great  doubt  whether  or  not  I 
should  impose  any  remarks  on  this  bill  upon  the  Con- 
vention, especially  after  my  friend  Mr.  Quigg  has  so 
ingeniously  made  it  difficult  for  me  to  speak ;  but  I  have 
been  so  long  deeply  interested  in  the  subject  of  the  bill, 
and  I  shall  have  so  few  opportunities  hereafter,  per- 
haps never  another,  that  I  cannot  refrain  from  testify- 
ing to  my  faith  in  the  principles  of  government  which 
underlie  the  measure,  and  putting  upon  this  record  for 
whatever  it  may  be  worth  the  conclusions  which  I  have 
reached  upon  the  teachings  of  long  experience  in  many 


Doc.  No.  50  2 

positions,  through  many  years  of  participation  in  the 
public  affairs  of  this  State  and  in  observation  of  them. 

I  wish,  in  the  first  place,  to  say  something  suggested 
by  the  question  of  my  friend,  Mr.  Brackett,  as  to  where 
this  short  ballot  idea  came  from.  It  came  up  out  of  the 
dark,  he  says. 

Let  us  see.  In  1910,  Governor  Hughes,  in  his  annual 
message,  said  this  to  the  Legislature  of  the  State: 
"  There  should  be  a  reduction  in  the  number  of  elective 
offices.  The  ends  of  democracy  will  be  better  attained 
to  the  extent  that  the  attention  of  the  voters  may  be 
focused  upon  comparatively  few  offices,  the  incumbents 
of  which  can  be  strictly  accountable  for  administration. 
This  will  tend  to  promote  efficiency  in  public  office  by 
increasing  the  effectiveness  of  the  voter  and  by  dimin- 
ishing the  opportunities  of  political  manipulators  who 
take  advantage  of  the  multiplicity  of  elective  offices  to 
perfect  their  schemes  at  the  public  expense.  I  am  in 
favor  of  as  few  elective  offices  as  may  be  consistent  with 
proper  accountability  to  the  people,  and  a  short  ballot. 
It  would  be  an  improvement,  I  believe,  in  state  admin- 
istration if  the  executive  responsibility  was  centered 
in  the  governor,  who  should  appoint  a  cabinet  of  ad- 
ministrative heads  accountable  to  him  and  charged 
with  the  duties  now  imposed  upon  elected  state 
offices." 

Following  that  message  from  Governor  Hughes,  to 
whom  the  people  of  this  State  look  with  respect  and 
honor,  a  resolution  for  the  amendment  to  the  Consti- 
tution was  introduced  in  the  Assembly  of  1910.  That 
resolution  provided  for  the  appointment  of  all  State 
officers,  except  the  Governor  and  the  Lieutenant- 
Governor. 


3  Doc.  No.  50 

There  was  a  hot  contest  upon  the  floor.  Speaker 
Wadsworth,  "  Young-  Jim,"  came  down  from  the 
Speaker's  chair  to  advocate  the  measure,  and  Jesse 
Phillips,  sitting  before  me,  voted  for  it.  And  so,  in  the 
practical  affairs  of  this  State,  the  movement  out  of 
which  this  bill  came  had  its  start  upon  the  floor  of  the 
State  Legislature. 

Hughes  and  Wadsworth,  one  drawing  from  his  ex- 
perience as  Governor  and  the  other  upon  his  observa- 
tions of  public  affairs,  from  the  desk  of  the  Speaker  of 
the  Assembly,  were  its  sponsors. 

Time  passed,  and  in  1912  the  movement  had  gained 
such  headway  among  the  people  of  the  State  that  the 
Republican  Convention  of  that  year  declared  its  ad- 
herence to  the  principle  of  the  short  ballot,  and  the 
Progressive  Convention,  in  framing  their  platform, 
under  which  200,000  —  it  is  safe,  is  it  not,  to  say  200,- 
000  —  of  the  Republican  voters  of  the  State  followed 
Roosevelt  as  their  leader,  rather  than  Taft.  The  Pro- 
gressive Convention,  in  framing  that  platform,  de- 
clared: "  We  favor  the  short  ballot  principle  and 
appropriate  constitutional  amendments." 

So  two  parties,  and  all  branches  of  the  Republican 
party  at  least,  committed  themselves  to  the  position 
that  Hughes  and  Wadsworth  took,  in  the  Assembly  of 
1910. 

In  1913,  after  the  great  defeat  of  1912,  when  the  Re- 
publicans of  the  State  were  seeking  to  bring  back  to 
their  support  the  multitudes  that  had  gone  off  with  the 
Progressive  movement,  when  they  were  seeking  to 
offer  a  program  of  constructive  forward  movement  in 
which  the  Republican  party  should  be  the  leader,  Re- 
publicans met  in  a  great  mass  meeting  in  the  city  of 
New  York,  on  the  5th  of  December  of  that  year,  1913. 


Doc.  No.  50  4 

Nine  hundred  and  seventy  Republicans  were  there 
from  all  parts  of  the  State.  It  was  a  crisis  in  the  af- 
fairs of  the  Republican  party.  The  party  must  com- 
mend itself  to  the  people  of  the  State,  or  it  was  gone. 
Twenty-eight  members  of  this  Convention  were  there, 
and  in  that  meeting,  free  to  all,  open  to  full  discussion, 
after  amendments  had  been  offered,  discussed  and 
voted  upon,  this  resolution  was  adopted : 

"  Whereas,  this  practice  (referring  to  the  long  bal- 
lot) is  also  in  violation  of  the  best  principles  of  organ- 
ization which  require  that  the  governor,  who  under  the 
constitution  is  the  responsible  chief  executive  should 
be  so  in  fact,  and  that  he  should  have  the  power  to 
select  his  official  agents ; 

"  Therefore,  be  it  Resolved  that  we  favor  the  ap- 
plication to  the  State  government  of  the  principle  of 
the  Short  Ballot,  which  is  that  only  those  offices  should 
be  elective  which  are  important  enough  to  attract  (and 
deserve)  public  examination  " 

"And  be  it  further  Resolved,  that,  in  com- 
pliance with  this  principle,  we  urge  the  representa- 
tives of  the  Republican  party  of  this  State,  in  the  Sen- 
ate and  Assembly,  to  support  a  resolution  providing 
for  the  submission  to  the  people  of  an  amendment  to 
the  constitution,  under  which  amendment  it  will  be  the 
duty  of  the  Governor  to  appoint  the  secretary  of  state, 
the  state  treasurer,  the  comptroller,  the  attorney-gen- 
eral, and  the  state  engineer  and  surveyor,  leaving  only 
the  Governor  and  Lieutenant-Governor  as  elective 
state  executive  officers." 

That  resolution,  T  say,  after  full  discussion  was 
unanimously  adopted  by  the  970'  representative   !' 


5  Doc.  No.  50 

publicans  who  had  met  there  to  present  to  the  people 
of  the  State  a  constructive  program  for  the  party. 
Mr.  Frederick  C.  Tanner  is  chairman  of  this  Commit- 
tee on  Governor  and  Other  State  Officers  to-day,  be- 
cause it  was  he  who  offered  the  resolution  in  that 
meeting  that  was  unanimously  approved  by  those  970 
Republicans.  He  is  executing  a  mandate.  He  is  car- 
rying out  a  policy.  He  is  fulfilling  a  pledge  to  the 
people. 

The  time  went  on  and  the  following  winter,  in  the 
Assembly  of  1914,  a  new  resolution  was  introduced 
following  the  terms  of  this  resolution  of  the  mass 
meeting,  following  the  terms  of  the  Hughes-Wads- 
worth  resolution  of  1910,  providing  that  all  these  State 
officers  except  the  Governor  and  Lieutenant-Governor 
should  be  appointed.  That  resolution  passed  the  As- 
sembly and  every  Republican  in  the  Assembly  voted 
for  it.  It  never  came  to  a  vote  in  the  Senate.  Voting 
for  that  resolution  were  four  members  of  the  Assem- 
bly, who  now  sit  in  tliis  Convention;  Mr.  Bockes,  Mr. 
Eisner,  Mr.  Hinman,  and  Mr.  Mathewson. 

Time  passed  on  and  in  the  autumn  of  1914  a  Repub- 
lican Convention  met  at  Saratoga;  an  unofficial  con- 
vention, we  are  told.  Unofficial!  Negligible!  Here  is 
the  law  under  which  it  was  called,  Section  45  of  the 
Election  Law: 

"  Nothing  contained  in  this  chapter  shall  prevent 
a  party  from  holding  party  conventions  to  be  consti- 
tuted in  such  manner  and  to  have  such  powers  in 
relation  to  formulating  party  platforms  and  policies 
and  the  transaction  of  business  relating  to  party  af- 
fairs as  the  rules  and  regulations  of  the  party  may 
provide,  not  inconsistent  with  the  provisions  of  this 
chapter." 


Doc.  No.  50  6 

That  Convention  was  thus  called  more  specifically 
and  solemnly  to  frame  a  platform  than  any  other  Con- 
vention that  ever  met  in  this  State,  for  that  was  its 
sole  business.  That  is  what  it  was  there  for,  to  define, 
to  declare,  to  set  before  the  people  the  faith  and  poli- 
cies of  the  Republican  party,  and  in  that  Convention 
there  was  a  report  from  the  Committee  on  Rules,  which 
embodied  deliberation,  full  discussion  and  mature 
judgment  such  as  no  report  that  ever  came  to  a  politi- 
cal convention  within  my  experience  ever  had.  The 
great  mass  meeting  of  December  5th,  1913,  had 
directed  the  appointment  of  a  Committee  of  Thirty  to 
meet  and  consider  and  prepare  for  submission  to  the 
Convention  a  statement  of  the  views  of  the  Republican 
party  regarding  the  new  Constitution.  That  Commit- 
tee was  appointed;  it  met  two  or  three  days  before  the 
Convention  in  the  city  of  Saratoga.  It  met  in  the  office 
of  my  friend,  Mr.  Brackett,  and  there  day  after  day 
it  discussed  the  subject,  reached  and  voted  upon  its 
conclusions  and  framed  a  report. 

Let  me  say  here  that  Senator  Brackett  never  agreed 
with  the  Committee.  He  has  been  consistent  and 
honest  and  open  in  the  declaration  of  his  views  from 
first  to  last,  but  he  was  voted  down  in  the  Committee 
of  Thirty.  Their  report  favoring  a  short  ballot,  among 
other  things,  was  presented  to  the  Convention.  That  re- 
port was  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Resolutions  of 
the  Convention,  a  Committee  of  42  members,  among 
them  were  twelve  members  of  this  Convention,  and 
that  Committee  on  Resolutions  took  up  the  report  of 
the  Committee  of  Thirty  and  discussed  it  all  day  and 
they  voted  upon  it,  and  again  Mr.  Brackett 's  view  was 
voted  down,  and  the   Committee   on  Resolutions   re 


7  Doc.  No.  50 

ported  to  the  Convention  the  plank  in  favor  of  the 
short  ballot  that  has  been  read  to  yon. 

Mr.  Brackett  —  Will  the  senator  permit  an  interrup- 
tion? I  know  you  have  not  intentionally  made  a  mis- 
statement, but  you  will  recall  that  a  report  of  the  Com- 
mittee of  Thirty  was  not  presented  to  the  Committee 
on  Platform  until  an  hour  before  the  Convention,  in 
the  little  room  at  the  end  of  the  piazza  —  before  the 
Convention  met, 

The  President  —  It  is  a  fact,  and  that  room  was  the 
scene  of  excited  and  hot  controversy  for  a  long  period 
over  the  adoption  of  that  report,  which  was  in  part 
adopted  and  in  part  rejected. 

Mr.  Brackett  —  If  you  will  pardon  a  suggestion,  you 
said  for  a  long  period.  It  was,  I  think,  about  an  hour 
and  a  half. 

Mr.  Deyo  —  Will  the  gentleman  give  way?  I  think 
that  lasted  until  the  following  day. 

Mr.  Root  —  It  did. 

Now,  when  it  came  to  the  Convention,  there  was  no 
doubt  about  the  subject  we  were  talking  on.  The 
temporary  chairman  of  the  Convention  had  said  to  the 
Convention,  "  The  reflections  which  arise  from  con- 
sidering the  relations  of  the  Executive  and  the  Legis- 
lature lead  inevitably  to  another  field  of  reform  in 
State  Government.  That  is,  the  adoption  of  the  short 
ballot.  That  is  demanded  both  for  the  efficiency  of 
our  electoral  system  and  for  the  efficiency  of  govern- 
ment after  election."  And  then,  after  stating  the 
first,  he  proceeded:  "  The  most  obvious  step  toward 
simplifying  the  ballot  in  this  State  is  to  have  the  heads 


Doc.  No.  50  8 

of  executive  departments  appointed  by  the  Governor, 
etc.  Still  more  important  would  be  the  effect  of  such 
a  change  upon  the  efficiency  of  government.  The  most 
important  thing  in  constituting  a  government  is  to 
unite  responsibility  with  power,  so  that  a  certain 
known  person  may  be  definitely  responsible  for  what 
ought  to  be  done;  to  be  rewarded  if  he  does  it,  pun- 
ished if  he  does  not  do  it,  and  that  the  person  held 
responsible  shall  have  the  power  to  do  the  thing. 
Under  our  system  we  have  divided  executive  power 
among  many  separately  elected  heads  of  departments, 
and  we  have  thus  obscured  responsibility,  because  in 
the  complicated  affairs  of  our  government  it  is  hard 
for  the  best  informed  to  know  who  is  to  be  blamed,  or 
who  is  to  be  praised,  who  ought  to  be  rewarded  and 
wTho  punished.  At  the  same  time  that  the  Governor 
is  empowered  to  appoint  the  heads  of  executive  de- 
partments and  made  responsible  for  their  conduct, 
there  ought  to  be  a  general  reorganization  of  the 
executive  branch  of  our  government." 

After  that,  Mr.  Chairman,  came  the  report  of  the 
Committee  on  Resolutions,  and  Mr.  Brackett  submitted 
a  minority  report,  taking  substantially  the  position 
which  he  has  taken  here.  That  minority  report  was 
read,  and  it  was  argued  at  length.  Amendments  were 
offered  and  discussed.  Mr.  Brackett,  I  repeat,  was 
heard  at  length  upon  it,  in  what  he  then  called  the 
"  great  council  of  the  party,"  and  he  was  beaten; 
beaten  fighting  manfully  for  his  opinions,  but  he  was 
beaten.  The  Republican  party  went  to  the  people  at 
the  coming  election  upon  the  declaration  that  it  was  in 
favor  of  applying  the  principle  of  the  short  ballot  to 
the  selection  of  executive  officers. 


9  Doc.  No.  50 

Now,  let  me  turn  to  the  other  side  of  the  story.  When 
the  resolution  for  the  short  ballot,  simon-pure,  making 
all  the  State  officers  but  the  Governor  and  Lieutenant- 
Governor  appointive,  was  before  the  Assembly  in  1914, 
Mr.  A.  E.  Smith,  the  member  of  this  Convention  whose 
attractive  personality  has  so  impressed  itself  upon 
every  member,  moved  an  amendment  to  limit  the 
change  to  appointment  of  the  Secretary  of  State,  State 
Engineer  and  Surveyor  and  State  Treasurer,  leaving 
the  Comptroller  and  Attorney-General  elective.  Upon 
that  amendment  the  Democrats  of  the  Assembly  stood, 
voting  with  him.  When  the  Democratic  convention 
met  in  that  autumn  they  put  themselves  on  Mr.  Smith's 
platform,  approved  his  action  and  that  of  the  Demo- 
crats in  the  Assembly  and  declared  in  favor  of  exactly 
what  he  called  for  in  his  amendment —  the  election  of 
the  Comptroller  and  the  Attorney-General  and  the  ap- 
pointment of  all  the  other  officers. 

So  you  have  this  movement,  not  coming  up  out  of  the 
dark,  but  begun  by  a  great  Governor  and  advocated  by 
a  great  Speaker,  both  of  whom  have  received  the  ap- 
proval of  their  country,  one  by  being  elevated  to  the 
bench  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  and 
the  other  to  the  Senate  of  the  United  States.  You  have 
the  movement  progressing  step  by  step  until  it  has% 
received  the  almost  universal  assent,  the  final  and  de- 
cisive action  of  the  party  to  which  that  Governor  and 
that  Speaker  belong,  repeated  over  and  over  and  over 
again,  fully  thought  out  and  discussed;  and  you  have 
the  other  party  accepting  the  principle,  agreeing  to  the 
application  of  it,  with  the  exception  of  the  Comptroller 
and  the  Attorney-General. 

Now,  we  must  vote  according  to  our  consciences.  We 
are  not  bound  —  no  legislative  body  is  bound  legally 


Doc.  No.  50  10 

by  a  platform.  But,  Mr.  Chairman,  if  there  is  faith  in 
parties,  if  there  is  ever  to  be  a  party  platform  put  out 
again,  to  which  a  man  can  subscribe  or  for  which  he  can 
vote  without  a  sense  of  futility,  without  a  sense  of 
being  engaged  in  a  confidence  game ;  if  all  the  declara- 
tions of  principle  by  political  parties  are  not  to  be  re- 
garded as  false  pretense,  as  humbug,  as  a  parcel  of 
lies,  we  must  stand  by  the  principles  upon  which  we 
were  all  elected  to  this  Convention.  There  is  one 
thing,  and,  in  so  far  as  I  know,  only  one  thing,  that  the 
vast  majority  of  us  have  assured  the  people  who 
elected  us  we  would  do  in  this  Convention,  and  that  is 
that  we  would  stand  by  the  position  of  Hughes  and 
Wadsworth.  I,  for  one,  am  going  to  do  it.  If  I  form 
a  correct  judgment  of  the  self-respecting  men  of  this 
Convention,  it  will  be  with  a  great  company  that  I  do 
it.  But,  Mr.  Chairman,  don't  let  us  rest  on  that.  Why 
was  it  that  these  conventions,  one  after  another,  four 
of  them,  declared  to  the  people  that  they  were  for  the 
principle  of  this  bill  ?  In  the  first  place,  our  knowledge 
of  human  nature  shows  us  that  the  thousands  of  ex- 
perienced men  in  these  conventions  and  meetings  had 
come  to  the  conclusion  that  that  principle  met  with  the 
opinion  of  the  people  of  the  State.  It  is  all  very  well 
for  Mr.  Qnigg  to  tell  us  what  the  men  he  met  in  Co- 
lumbia county  said,  for  Mr.  Green  to  write  letters  to 
his  friends  in  Binghamton,  but  970  men  in  that  mass 
meeting  on  the  5th  of  December  told  you  what  their 
observation  was,  that  they  would  commend  their  party 
to  the  people  of  this  State  by  declaring  this  principle. 
A  thousand  and  odd  men  in  the  Republican  conventions 
of  1912,  1913  and  1914  have  given  proof  conclusive  of 
what  their  observation  of  public  opinion  was.  A  thou- 


11  Doc.  No.  50 

sand  and  odd  men  in  the  Democratic  convention  of  1914 
have  given  i^roof  conclusive  of  what  their  observation 
of  public  opinion  was.  Conventions  don't  put  planks 
in  platforms  to  drive  away  votes. 

Again  I  ask,  why  was  it  that  they  thought  that  these 
principles  would  commend  their  tickets  to  the  people 
of  the  State!  "Why  was  it  that  the  people  of  the  State 
had  given  evidence  to  these  thousands  of  experienced 
men  in  the  politics  of  the  State  that  those  principles 
would  be  popular?  Well,  of  course,  you  cannot  escape 
the  conclusion  that  it  was  because  the  people  of  the 
State  found  something  wrong  about  the  government  of 
the  State.  My  friend,  Mr.  Brackett,  sees  nothing- 
wrong  about  it.  He  has  been  for  fifteen  years  in  the 
Senate;  I  suppose  he  could  have  stayed  there  as  long- 
as  he  wanted  to.  He  is  honored  and  respected  and  has 
his  own  way  in  Saratoga  county.  Why  should  he  see 
anything  wrong!  My  friend,  Mr.  Green,  is  comfortably 
settled  in  the  Excise  Department,  and  he  sees  nothing 
wrong.  Mr.  Chairman,  there  never  was  a  reform  in 
administration  in  this  world  which  did  not  have  to 
make  its  way  against  the  strong  feeling  of  good,  honest 
men,  concerned  in  existing  methods  of  administration, 
and  who  saw  nothing  wrong.  Never !  It  is  no  impeach- 
ment to  a  man's  honesty,  his  integrity,  that  he  thinks 
the  methods  that  he  is  familiar  with  and  in  which  he  is 
engaged  are  all  right.  But  you  cannot  make  any  im- 
provement in  this  world  without  overriding  the  satis- 
faction that  men  have  in  the  things  as  they  are,  and  of 
which  they  are  a  contented  and  successful  part,  I  say 
that  the  growth,  extension,  general  acceptance  of  this 
principle  shows  that  all  these  experienced  politicians 
and  citizens  in  all  these  Conventions  felt  that  the  peo- 


Doc.  No.  50  12 

pie  of  the  State  saw  something  wrong  in  our  State 
government,  and  we  are  here  charged  with  a  dirty,  not 
of  closing  our  eyes,  but  of  opening  them,  and  seeing,  if 
we  can,  what  it  was  that  was  wrong. 

Now,  anybody  can  see  that  all  these  152  outlying- 
agencies,  big  and  little,  lying  around  loose,  accountable 
to  nobody,  spending  all  the  money  they  could  get, 
violate  every  principle  of  economy,  of  efficiency,  of  the 
proper  transaction  of  business.  Everyone  can  see 
that  all  around  us  are  political  organizations  carrying- 
on  the  business  of  government,  that  have  learned  their 
lesson  from  the  great  business  organizations  which 
have  been  so  phenomenally  successful  in  recent  years. 

The  governments  of  our  cities :  Why,  twenty  years 
ago,  when  James  Bryce  wrote  his  "American  Common- 
wealth," the  government  of  American  cities  was  a  by- 
word and  a  shame  for  Americans  all  over  the  world. 
Heaven  be  thanked,  the  government  of  our  cities  has 
now  gone  far  toward  redeeming  itself  and  us  from  that 
disgrace,  and  the  government  of  American  cities  to- 
day is  in  the  main  far  superior  to  the  government  of 
American  States.  I  challenge  contradiction  to  that 
statement.  How  has  it  been  reached?  How  have  our 
cities  been  lifted  up  from  the  low  grade  of  incompe- 
tency and  corruption  on  which  they  stood  when  the 
"American  Commonwealth  "  was  written?  It  has  been 
done  by  applying  the  principles  of  this  bill  to  city 
government,  by  giving  power  to  the  men  elected  by  the 
people  to  do  the  things  for  which  they  were  elected. 
So  I  say  it  is  quite  plain  that  that  is  not  all.  It  is  not 
all. 

I  am  going  to  discuss  a  subject  now  that  goes  back 
to  the  beginning  of  the  political  life  of  the  oldest  man 


13  Doc.  No.  50 

in  this  Convention,  and  one  to  which  we  cannot  close 
our  eyes,  if  we  keep  the  obligations  of  our  oath.  We 
talk  about  the  government  of  the  Constitution.  We 
have  spent  many  days  in  discussing  the  powers  of  this 
and  that  and  the  other  officer.  What  is  the  govern- 
ment of  this  State?  What  has  it  been  during  the  forty 
years  of  my  acquaintance  with  it  ?  The  government 
of  the  Constitution?  Oh,  no;  not  half  the  time,  or 
half  way.  When  I  ask  what  do  the  people  find 
wrong  in  our  State  government,  my  mind  goes  back 
to  those  periodic  fits  of  public  rage  in  which  the  peo- 
ple rouse  up  and  tear  down  the  political  leader,  first 
of  one  party  and  then  of  the  other  party.  It  goes  on 
to  the  public  feeling  of  resentment  against,  the  control 
of  party  organizations,  of  both  parties  and  of  all 
parties. 

Now,  I  treat  this  subject  in  my  own  mind  not  as  a 
personal  question  to  any  man.  I  am  talking  about  the 
system.  From  the  days  of  Penton,  and  Conkling,  and 
Arthur  and  Cornell,  and  Piatt,  from  the  days  of  David 
B.  Hill,  down  to  the  present  time  the  government  of 
the  State  has  presented  two  different  lines  of  activity, 
one  of  the  constitutional  and  statutory  officers  of  the 
State,  and  the  other  of  the  party  leaders, —  they  call 
them  party  bosses.  They  call  the  system  —  I  don't 
coin  the  phrase,  I  adopt  it  because  it  carries  its  own 
meaning — the  system  they  call  ''invisible  govern- 
ment ".  For  I  don't  remember  how  many  years,  Mr. 
Conkling  was  the  supreme  ruler  in  this  State;  the 
Governor  did  not  count,  the  legislatures  did  not  count; 
comptrollers  and  secretaries  of  state  and  what  not, 
did  not  count.  It  was  what  Mr.  Conkling  said,  and  in 
a  great  outburst  of  public  rage  he  wras  pulled  down. 


Doc.  No.  50  14 

Then  Mr.  Piatt  ruled  the  State ;  for  nigh  upon  twenty 
years  he  ruled  it.  It  was  not  the  Governor;  it  was  not 
the  Legislature ;  it  was  not  any  elected  officers ;  it  was 
Mr.  Piatt.  And  the  capitol  was  not  here ;  it  was  at  49 
Broadway;  Mr.  Piatt  and  his  lieutenants.  It  makes  no 
difference  what  name  you  give,  whether  you  call  it  Fen- 
ton  or  Conkling  or  Cornell  or  Arthur  or  Piatt,  or  by  the 
names  of  men  now  living.  The  ruler  of  the  State  dur- 
ing the  greater  part  of  the  forty  years  of  my  acquaint- 
ance with  the  State  government  has  not  been  any  man 
authorized  by  the  Constitution  or  by  the  law,  and,  sir, 
there  is  throughout  the  length  and  breadth  of  this 
State  a  deep  and  sullen  and  long-continued  resentment 
at  being  governed  thus  by  men  not  of  the  people's 
choosing.  The  party  leader  is  elected  by  no  one,  ac- 
countable to  no  one,  bound  by  no  oath  of  office,  remov- 
able by  no  one.  Ah !  My  friends  here  have  talked  about 
this  bill's  creating  an  autocracy.  The  word  points 
with  admirable  facility  the  very  opposite  reason  for 
the  bill.  It  is  to  destroy  autocracy  and  restore  power 
so  far  as  may  be  to  the  men  elected  by  the  people, 
accountable  to  the  people,  removable  by  the  people. 
I  don't  criticise  the  men  of  the  invisible  government. 
How  can  I?  I  have  known  them  all,  and  among  them 
have  been  some  of  nry  dearest  friends.  I  can  never 
forget  the  deep  sense  of  indignation  that  I  felt  in  the 
abuse  that  was  heaped  upon  Chester  A.  Arthur,  whom 
I  honored  and  loved,  when  he  was  attacked  because 
he  held  the  position  of  political  leader.  But  it  is  all 
wrong.  It  is  all  wrong  that  a  government  not  author- 
ized by  the  people  should  be  continued  superior  to  the 
government  that  is  authorized  by  the  people. 

How   is   it   accomplished?      How   is   it   done?     Mr. 


15  Doc.  No.  50 

Chairman,  it  is  done  by  the  use  of  patronage,  and  the 
patronage  that  my  friends  on  the  other  side  of  this 
question  have  been  arguing  and  pleading  for  in  this 
Convention  is  the  power  to  continue  that  invisible 
government  against  that  authorized  by  the  people. 
Everywhere,  sir,  that  these  two  systems  of  govern- 
ment co-exist,  there  is  a  conflict  day  by  day,  and  year 
by  year,  between  two  principles  of  appointment  to 
office,  two  radically  opposed  principles.  The  elected 
officer  or  the  appointed  officer,  the  lawful  officer  who  is 
to  be  held  responsible  for  the  administration  of  his 
office,  desires  to  get  men  into  the  different  positions  of 
his  office  who  will  do  their  work  in  a  way  that  is  credit- 
able to  him  and  his  administration.  Whether  it  be  a 
president  appointing  a  judge,  or  a  governor  appoint- 
ing a  superintendent  of  public  works,  whatever  it  may 
be,  the  officer  wants  to  make  a  success,  and  he  wants 
to  get  the  man  selected  upon  the  ground  of  his  ability 
to  do  the  work. 

How  is  it  about  the  boss?  What  does  the  boss  have 
to  do?  He  has  to  urge  the  appointment  of  a  man  whose 
appointment  will  consolidate  his  power  and  preserve 
the  organization.  The  invisible  government  pro- 
ceeds to  build  up  and  maintain  its  power  by  a 
reversal  of  the  fundamental  principle  of  good  govern- 
ment, which  is  that  men  should  be  selected  to  per- 
form the  duties  of  the  office ;  and  to  substitute  the  idea 
that  men  should  be  appointed  to  office  for  the  preserva- 
tion and  enhancement  and  power  of  the  political 
leader.  The  one,  the  true  one,  looks  upon  appoint- 
ment to  office  with  a  view  to  the  service  that  can  be 
given  to  the  public.  The  other,  the  false  one,  looks 
upon  appointment  to  office  with  a  view  to  what  can  be 


Doc.  No.  50  16 

gotten  out  of  it.  Gentlemen  of  the  Convention,  I  ap- 
peal to  your  knowledge  of  facts.  Every  one  of  you 
knows  that  what  I  say  about  the  use  of  patronage 
under  the  system  of  invisible  government  is  true. 
Louis  Marshall  told  us  the  other  day  about  the  appoint- 
ment of  wardens  in  the  Adirondacks,  hotel  keepers 
and  people  living  there,  to  render  no  service  whatever. 
They  were  appointed  not  for  the  service  that  they 
were  to  render  to  the  State;  they  were  appointed  for 
the  service  they  were  to  render  to  promote  the  power  of 
a  political  organization.  Mr.  Chairman,  we  all  know 
that  the  halls  of  this  capitol  swarm  with  men  during 
the  session  of  the  Legislature  on  pay  day.  A  great 
number,  seldom  here,  rendering  no  service,  are  put  on 
the  payrolls  as  a  matter  of  patronage,  not  of  service, 
but  of  party  patronage.  Both  parties  are  alike;  all 
parties  are  alike.  The  system  extends  through  all. 
Ah,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  system  finds  its  opportunity  in 
the  division  of  powers,  in  a  six-headed  executive,  in 
which,  by  the  natural  workings  of  human  nature  there 
shall  be  opposition  and  discord  and  the  playing  of  one 
force  against  the  other,  and  so,  when  we  refuse  to  make 
one  Governor  elected  by  the  people  the  real  chief 
executive,  we  make  inevitable  the  setting  up  of  a  chief 
executive  not  selected  by  the  people,  not  acting  for  the 
people's  interest,  but  for  the  selfish  interesl  of  the  few 
who  control  the  party,  whichever  party  it  may  be. 
Think  for  a  moment  of  what  this  patronage  system 
means.  How  many  of  you  are  there  who  would  be  will- 
ing to  do  to  your  private  client,  or  customer,  or  any 
private  trust,  or  to  a  friend  or  neighbor,  what  you  see 
being  done  to  the  State  of  New  York  every  year  of 
your  lives  in  the  taking  of  money  out  of  her  treasury 


17  Doc.  No.  51 

without  service?  We  can,  when  we  are  in  a  private 
station,  pass  on  without  much  attention  to  inveterate 
abuses.  We  can  say  to  ourselves,  I  know  it  is  wrong, 
I  wish  it  could  be  set  right ;  it  cannot  be  set  right,  I  will 
do  nothing.  But  here,  here,  we  face  the  duty,  we  can- 
not escape  it,  we  are  bound  to  do  our  work,  face  to  face, 
in  clear  recognition  of  the  truth,  unpalatable,  deplor- 
able as  it  may  be,  and  the  truth  is  that  what  the  un- 
erring instinct  of  the  democracy  of  our  State  has  seen 
in  this  government  is  that  a  different  standard  of  mor- 
ality is  applied  to  the  conduct  of  affairs  of  State  than 
that  which  is  applied  in  private  affairs.  I  have  been 
told  forty  times  since  this  Convention  met  that  you 
cannot  change  it.  We  can  try,  can't  we?  I  deny  that 
we  cannot  change  it.  I  repel  that  cynical  assumption 
which  is  born  of  the  lethargy  that  comes  from  poisoned 
air  during  all  these  years.  I  assert  that  this  perver- 
sion of  democracy,  this  robbing  democracy  of  its  viril- 
ity, can  be  changed  as  truly  as  the  system  under  which 
Walpole  governed  the  commons  of  England,  by  brib- 
ery, as  truly  as  the  atmosphere  which  made  the  credit 
mobilier  scandal  possible  in  the  Congress  of  the  United 
States  has  been  blown  away  by  the  force  of  public 
opinion.  We  cannot  change  it  in  a  moment,  but  we  can 
do  oar  share.  We  can  take  this  one  step  toward,  not 
robbing  the  people  of  their  part  in  government,  but 
toward  robbing  an  irresponsible  autocracy  of  its  inde- 
fensible and  unjust  and  undemocratic  control  of  gov- 
ernment, and  restoring  it  to  the  people  to  be  exercised 
by  the  men  of  their  choice  and  their  control. 

Mr.  Chairman,  this  Convention  is  a  great  event  in 
the  life  of  every  man  in  this  room.  A  body  which  sits 
but  once  in  twenty  years  to  deal  with  the  fundamental 


Doc.  No.  50  18 

law  of  the  State  deals  not  only  for  the  present  but  for 
the  future,  not  only  by  its  results  but  by  its  example. 
Opportunity  knocks  at  the  door  of  every  man  in  this  as- 
semblage, an  opportunity  which  will  never  come  again 
to  most  of  us.  While  millions  of  men  are  fighting  and 
dying  for  their  countries  across  the  ocean,  while  gov- 
ernment has  become  serious,  sober,  almost  alarming  in 
its  effect  upon  the  happiness  of  the  lives  of  all  that  are 
dearest  to  us,  it  is  our  inestimable  privilege  to  do  some- 
thing here  in  moving  our  beloved  State  along  the  path- 
way towards  better  and  purer  government,  a  more 
pervasive  morality  and  a  more  effective  exercise  of  the 
powers  of  government  which  preserve  the  liberty  of 
the  people.  When  you  go  back  to  your  homes  and  re- 
view the  record  of  the  summer,  you  will  find  in  it  a  cause 
for  your  children  and  your  children's  children,  who 
will  review  the  Convention  of  1915  as  we  have  been  re- 
viewing the  work  of  the  preceding  Conventions,  to  say, 
my  father,  my  grandfather,  helped  to  do  this  work  for 
our  State. 

Mr.  Chairman,  there  is  a  plain  old  house  in  the 
Oneida  hills,  overlooking  the  valley  of  the  Mohawk, 
where  truth  and  honor  dwelt  in  my  youth.  When  I  go 
back,  as  I  am  about  to  go,  to  spend  my  declining  years, 
I  mean  to  go  with  the  feeling  that  I  have  not  failed 
to  speak  and  to  act  here  in  accordance  with  the  lessons 
I  learned  there  from  the  God  of  my  fathers.  God 
grant  that  this  opportunity  for  service  to  our  coun- 
try and  our  State  may  not  be  neglected  by  any  of 
the  men  for  whom  I  feel  so  deep  a  friendship  in  this 
Convention. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN   CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  51 


REPORT  OF  COMMITTEE  ON  REVISION  AND 
ENGROSSMENT,  PURSUANT  TO  THE  RULES  OF 
THE  CONVENTION  AND  RESOLUTIONS  ADOPTED 
SEPTEMBER  4,  1915,  PRESENTING  THE  PRESENT 
CONSTITUTION  OF  THE  STATE  WITH  THE 
AMENDMENTS  THERETO  ADOPTED  BY  THE 
CONVENTION,  PROPERLY  INSERTED,  WITH  SUCH 
CHANGES  AS  THE  COMMITTEE  DEEMED  IT 
ADVISABLE  TO  INCORPORATE  THEREIN 


September  9,  1915 
To  the  Convention: 

Since  the  recess  of  the  convention  on  September  fourth  the 
Committee  on  Revision  and  Engrossment  has  been  engaged  in 
preparing  a  draft  of  the  present  constitution  of  the  state  and  in 
inserting-  therein  the  amendments  adopted  by  this  convention. 

The  draft  prepared  by  the  committee  has  been  compared  with 
the  original  draft  of  the  constitution  of  1894  on  deposit  in  the 
state  library  and  with  the  engrossed  copies  of  the  amendments 
signed  by  the  president  of  this  convention. 

Upon  this  draft  as  a  basis  the  committee  has  proceeded  to  make 
such  changes  as  were  necessary  to  incorporate  the  amendments 
adopted  by  this  convention  and  to  make  such  alterations  as  were 
necessary  to  make  the  language  of  the  constitution  consistent  and 
uniform. 


Doc.  No.  51  2 

The  committee  found  that  the  constitution  of  1894,  as  adopted, 
abounded  in  the  use  of  capitals,  while  the  amendments  made 
thereto  during  the  past  twenty  years  are  almost  entirely  devoid 
of  capitals. 

The  committee  has  adopted  the  style  of  the  amendments  made 
to  the  constitution  since  1894  as  the  more  modern  method  of 
capitalization  and  has  made  the  capitalization  throughout  the  con- 
stitution uniform. 

As  this  change  can  not  possibly  affect  the  substance  of  the  con- 
stitution, it  seems  unnecessary  to  refer  specifically  to  any  of  these 
changes. 

The  punctuation  of  the  existing  constitution  is  more  profuse 
than  that  which  is  now  employed,  but  the  coimnittee  has  not 
deemed  it  wise  to  change  the  punctuation  of  the  un-amended 
portions  of  the  constitution  of  1894,  although  it  has  not  hesitated 
to  strike  out  or  insert  commas  in  any  of  the  amendments  made 
by  this  convention  where  such  a  change  could  not  affect  the  mean- 
ing of  the  provisions. 

In  the  following  instances  commas  have  been  omitted: 

Page  8,  lino  24,  after  the  word  "  meetings  " ; 

Page  9,  line  35,  after  the  word  "apportionment"; 

Page  9,  line  36,  after  the  word  "senator"; 

Page  9,  line  37,  after  the  word  "  senator  " ; 

Page  9,  line  37,  after  the  word  "  senators  " ; 

Page  10,  line  32,  after  the  word  "supervisors"; 

Page  10,  line  32,  after  the  word  "  or  " ; 

Page  11,  line  23,  after  the  word  "  district"; 

Page  11,  line  24,  after  the  word  "  which  "  ; 

Page  11,  line  25,  after  the  word  "  districts"; 

Page  11,  line  33,  after  the  word  "time"; 

Page  11,  line  33,  after  the  word  "towns"; 

Page  11,  line  37,  after  the;  word  "legislature"; 

Page  11,  line  37,  after  the  word  "body"; 

Page  11,  lino  41,  after  the  word  "  apportionment"; 

Page  17,  line  34,  after  the  word  "  time  " ; 

Page  24,  line  35,  after  the  word  "  powers  " ; 

Page  25,  line  27,  after  the  word  "  treasurer"; 

Page  25,  line  29,  after  the  word  "  office  " ; 

Page  43,  line  40,  after  the  word  "  of  " ; 

Pago  43,  line  40,  after  the  word  "  exceed  " ; 


3  Doc.  No.  51 

Page  43,  line  41,  after  the  word  "  courts  " ; 

Page  65,  line  18,  after  the  word  "  ability  " ; 

Page  05,  line  29,  after  the  word  "  vote  ". 

In  the  following  instances  commas  have  been  inserted: 

Page  3,  line  4,  after  the  word  "  referee  "; 

Page  7,  line  3G,  after  the  word  "  enumeration  "  ; 

Page  36,  line  8,  after  the  word  "  may  "  ; 

Page  45,  line  6,  after  the  word  "  twenty-two  " ; 

Page  65,  line  18,  after  the  dash  "  —  ". 

In  the  following  instances  the  punctuation  has  been  changed : 

Page  2,  line  28,  following  the  word  "  years  "  the  apostrophe 
(')  has  been  omitted. 

The  semicolons  appearing  in  section  19,  page  14,  lines  10  to  35, 
inclusive,  following  the  respective  clauses  take  the  place  of  periods 
which  were  improperly  used  in  the  constitution  of  1894. 

Pages  22  and  23,  article  six,  the  paragraphs  relating  to  the 
civil  departments  are  numbered  for  convenience  in  reference  from 
one  to  seventeen,  respectively,  to  correspond  with  the  numbering 
appearing  in  section  one  of  such  article. 

The  word  "  said  "  appears  quite  commonly  in  the  present  con- 
stitution and  in  the  amendments  made  during  the  past  twenty 
years,  while  in  the  amendments  proposed  by  this  convention  the 
word  "  such"  has  generally  been  used  in  place  thereof. 

The  committee  regards  the  word  "  such  "  as  the  preferable 
term,  although  in  a  few  instances  the  word  "  said  "  has  been 
preserved. 

In  the  following  instances  the  word  "  such  "  has  been  substi- 
tuted for  the  word  "  said  "  : 

Page  5,  line  12 ;  page  5,  line  14;  page  9,  line  23 ;  page  11,  line 
26;  page  12,  line  1;  page  14,  line  6;  page  14,  line  23;  page  30, 
line  27;  page  30,  line  34;  page  37,  line  23;  page  41,  line  33; 
page  41,  line  41;  page  44,  line  2;  page  44,  line  23;  page  48, 
line  25;  page  48,  line  39;  page  49,  line  3;  page  49,  line  4; 
page  53,  line  30 ;  page  54,  line  9  ;  page  54,  line  29 ;  page  54,  line 
31 ;  page  54,  line  35  ;  page  54,  line  39  ;  page  56,  line  13 ;  page  56, 
line  13 ;  page  57,  line  23 ;  page  57,  line  24 ;  page  57,  line  28 ;  page 
69,  line  17. 

The  expressions  "  the  state  "  and  "  this  state  "  occur  throughout 
the  constitution.      The  committee  has  not  made  the  expression 


Doc.  No.  51  4 

uniform,  because  it  found  that  there  was  an  appropriateness  in 
most  cases  in  using  the  particular  form  that  was  employed. 

Likewise  the  expressions  "  the  constitution  "  and  "  this  con- 
stitution "  appear  without  any  discrimination  in  their  use.  The 
committee,  with  one  or  two  exceptions,  has  made  the  reference  to 
the  constitution  read  "  this  constitution  ". 

In  the  following  instances  this  has  been  done : 

Page  56,  line  21;  page  57,  line  7;  page  59,  line  7;  page  59, 
line  9;  page  67,  line  19;  page  67,  line  31;  page  68,  line  13; 
page  68,  line  40. 

In  amendments  adopted  by  this  convention  the  word  "  electors  " 
has  been  substituted  for  the  word  "  voters  ".  The  word  "  voters  " 
however  occurs  in  two  instances  in  the  existing  constitution,  and 
in  these  cases  it  has  been  changed  to  the  word  "  electors  "  to  make 
the  use  of  terms  for  the  same  subject  uniform.  This  change  has 
been  made  in  the  following  instances:  Page  8,  line  14,  and  page 
8,  line  15. 

The  word  "  people  "  has  been  changed  to  the  word  "  electors  " 
ait  page  51,  line  37,  the  former  word  being  plainly  erroneously 
used. 

The  words  "  constitute  a  quorum  "  which  is  the  expression  com- 
monly employed,  have  been  used  in  place  of  the  words  "  form  a 
quorum".     (See  page  33,  line  31;  page  34,  lino  10.) 

Where  the  salary  of  an  officer  is  specified  the  expression 
"annual  salary"  has  been  employed  instead  of  the  expression 
a  specified  salary  "per  year",  in  order  to  make  the  language 
in  this  respect  uniform.     (See  page  37,  lines  1  and  2.) 

The  prevailing  expression  used  in  the  constitution  in  designating 
the  month  and  the  day  of  the  month  is,  for  instance,  "  the  first 
day  of  January"  and  not  "  January  first  ".  The  former  expres- 
sion  has  been  used  in  the  proposed  draft  of  the  constitution  for  the 
sake  of  uniformity.  It  seems  unnecessary  to  call  attention  to  those 
changes  in  detail. 

Likewise,  the  prevailing  expression  in  designating  the  year  is, 
for  instance,  "one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  fifteen"  and  not 
"  nineteen  hundred  and  fifteen  ".  The  latter  lias  been  used  in  the 
recent  amendments  made  to  the  constitution  of  1894,  but  the  com- 
mittee feels  that,  in  a  formal  document  like  the  constitution  of  the 
State  it  is  well  to  follow  the  expression  "one  thousand  nine  hun- 


5  Doc.  No.  51 

dred  and  fifteen  "  instead  of  the  less  formal  expression  "  nineteen 
hundred  and  fifteen  ". 

The  expression  "  yeas  and  nays  "  is  the  predominant  one  in  the 
constitution  in  reference  to  voting  in  that  manner  and  in  the  only 
instance  where  "  ayes  and  noes  "  appears  the  expression  has  been 
changed  to  "  yeas  and  nays  ".     (See  page  46,  line  12.) 

The  spelling  of  the  word  "  moneys  "  which  in  one  instance  is 
spelled  "  m-o-n-i-e-s  "  has  been  made  to  read  "  m-o-n-e-y-s  "  where 
it  appears  in  the  constitution.     (See  page  20,  line  37.) 

The  word  "  residue  "  as  applied  to  the  unexpired  term  of  an 
office  where  a  vacancy  occurs  has  been  changed  to  "  remainder  ", 
which  is  used  in  nearly  all  instances  in  the  present  constitution. 
(See  page  12,  line  30 ;  page  40,  line  6.) 

In  view  of  the  change  in  the  language  of  the  constitution  relat- 
ing to  the  enumeration  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  state  which  will 
not  require  such  an  enumeration  except  where  a  federal  census  is 
not  available,  it  became  necessary  to  change  the  language  of  the 
constitution  in  some  places. 

For  instance,  on  page  7,  lino  35,  the  word  "state"  has  been 
stricken  out  and  the  remainder  of  the  line  after  the  word  "  enu- 
meration ",  and  all  before  tho  word  "  electors  "  on  line  36,  and 
after  the  word  "  preceding  "  the  words  "  federal  or  state  census  " 
have  been  inserted  ",  so  that  the  sentence  will  read  "  In  cities  and 
villages  having  five  thousand  inhabitants  or  more,  according  to  the 
last  preceding  federal  or  state  census  or  enumeration  ",  etc.,  and 
on  page  28,  line  15,  after  the  word  "every"  there  has  been  in- 
serted the  words  "  federal  census  or  state  "  and  there  has  been 
stricken  out  on  line  16,  the  words  "  under  the  constitution,  of  the 
inhabitants  of  tho  state  "  so  that  the  sentence  will  road  "  The  legis- 
lature may  alter  the  judicial  districts  once  after  every  federal 
census  or  state  enumeration,"  etc.  Page  28,  line  23,  the  words 
"  state,  or  "  have  been  omitted  and  the  words  "  or  state  ",  have 
been  inserted  after  the  word  "  federal  ",  so  as  to  make  the  language 
uniform  with  the  change  made  in  a  preceding  part  of  the  same 
section,  and  on  page  28,  line  26,  the  words  "state  or"  have  been 
stricken  out  and  after  the  word  "  federal  "  have  been  inserted  the 
words  "  or  state  "  for  a  like  reason. 

Page  28,  line  20,  the  letter  "s"  is  added  to  the  word  "dis- 
trict ".  * 

Page  63,  line  15,  insert  after  the  word  "  latest  "  the  words 


Doc.  No.  51  6 

"  federal  or  "  and  after  the  word  "  state  "  the  words  "  census  or  " 
so  that  the  sentence  will  read  "All  cities  are  classified  according  to 
the  latest  federal  or  state  census  or  enumeration  ". 

The  committee  has  not  in  all  instances  brought  the  parts  of 
verbs  together,  but  an  exception  has  been  made  on  page  thirteen 
in  section  ten,  on  account  of  the  wide  separation  of  the  verb  "  may 
convene  ",  and  has  eliminated  the  word  "  may  "  from  line  one  and 
inserted  it  before  the  word  "  convene  "  in  line  four.  Likewise 
after  the  word  "  assembly  "  in  line  six  the  word  "  may  "  has  been 
eliminated  and  inserted  before  the  word  "  convene  "  in  line  eight. 

On  page  15,  line  35,  a  reference  appears  to  article  seven  of  the 
existing  constitution.  On  account  of  the  renumbering  of  the  arti- 
cles it  has  been  necessary  to  change  this  reference  to  "  nine " ; 
and  in  order  to  make  the  reference  specific  it  has  also  been  neces- 
sary to  add  after  the  word  "  constitution  "  the  words  "  or  section 
four  of  former  article  seven  thereof  as  in  force  on  the  first  day  of 
January,  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  ten." 

On  page  17,  line  26,  the  word  "  political  "  has  been  changed 
to  "  civil ",  and  again  on  line  28,  to  make  the  expression  corre- 
spond with  the  usual  term  employed  in  the  remainder  of  the  con- 
stitution. 

Page  21,  lines  30  and  31,  the  words  "and  the  comptroller" 
have  been  stricken  out  and  the  comma  after  the  word  "  governor  " 
and  the  word  "  and  "  has  been  inserted  after  the  word  "  gov- 
ernor ",  because  the  comptroller  has  been  made  the  head  of  one  of 
the  departments  of  the  state  government. 

Page  22,  line  37,  after  the  word  "  the  "  the  words  "  head  of 
the  "  have  been  inserted  and  the  words  "  administered  by  "  have 
been  stricken  out  to  make  the  expression  uniform  with  the  other 
subdivisions  of  section  2  in  designating  the  head  of  the  department. 

Page  33,  line  15,  the  word  "whom"  has  been  changed  to 
"  which  "  to  correct  an  obvious  grammatical  error. 

Page  20,  lino  1  1,  the  word  "  their  "  has  been  changed  to  "  its  ", 
to  correct  a  grammatical  error. 

Page  41,  line  12,  after  the  word  "sessions"  the  words  "in 
and  "  have  been  inserted  to  perfect  the  reference  to  the  "  court  of 
general  sessions  in  and  for  the  city  and  county  of  New  York  " 
which  is  the  name  of  the  existing  court. 

Page  48,  lino  :!!),  and  page  49,  line  1,  the  words  "  state  commis- 
sion of  highwavs"  have  been  stricken  out  and  the  words  "super- 


7  Doc.  No.  51 

intendent  of  public  works  "  have  been  inserted  in  their  stead,  be- 
cause under  this  constitution  the  superintendent  of  public  works 
has  charge  of  the  highways  of  the  state. 

Page  49,  line  4,  change  the  word  "  it  "  to  "  he  ". 

Page  51,  line  24,  the  word  "  ten  "  has  been  stricken  out  and 
the  word  "  thirteen  "  inserted  to  correct  a  reference,  which  is 
made  necessary  by  the  renumbering  of  articles. 

Page  59,  line  2,  the  word  "  supplying  "  has  been  stricken  out 
and  the  word  "  filling  "  inserted  in  its  place  to  correct  a  bad  use  of 
English. 

Page  62,  lines  27  to  31,  the  language  relating  to  the  adoption 
of  new  charters  by  cities  was  confused,  and  the  committee  has  in- 
serted in  line  29  a  comma  after  "  seventeen  ",  and  in  line  30  a 
comma  after  "  provide "  and  after  the  word  "  thereafter  "  the 
words  "  either  at  the  general  or  at  a  special  election  ",  so  that  the 
sentence  will  read  "At  the  general  election  in  the  year  one  thou- 
sand nine  hundred  and  seventeen,  and  unless  its  charter  after  one 
revision  thereof  shall  otherwise  provide,  in  every  eighth  year 
thereafter  either  at  the  general  or  at  a  special  election,  every  city 
shall  submit  to  the  electors  thereof,  the  question  "  Shall  there  be  a 
commission  to  revise  the  charter  of  the  city?  ". 

Page  67,  line  26,  the  word  "  each"  has  been  changed  to  the  word 
"  such  ",  to  correct  an  obvious  error. 

Page  69,  line  22,  the  word  "  nine  "  has  been  changed  to  the  word 
"  seven  "  to  correct  the  reference  made  necessary  by  the  renumber- 
ing of  the  articles. 

On  page  69,  line  26,  the  words  "  such  "  and  "  seven  "  have  been 
stricken  out,  and  on  line  27  the  words  "  as  amended  "  and  there 
have  been  inserted  after  the  word  "  article  "  the  words  "  nine  of 
this  constitution  ". 

Page  68,  line  5,  the  words  "  next  ensuing  after  "  have  been 
stricken  out  and  the  word  "  following "  has  been  inserted. 

Page  45,  line  13,  the  letter  "  s  "  is  added  to  the  word  "office  ". 

The  committee  found  it  necessary  by  reason  of  the  creation  of 
new  articles  and  new  sections  to  renumber  the  articles  and  sections 
in  some  instances.  These  changes  appear  in  the  schedule  which  is 
attached  to  this  report,  so  that  it  is  not  deemed  necessary  to  call 
attention  to  them  specifically. 

All  of  the  references  in  the  proposed  constitution  have  been 
checked  up  and  are  believed  to  be  correct. 


Doc.  No.  51  8 

All  the  changes  reported  by  the  committee,  it  is  believed,  come 
within  the  power  of  the  committee  to  correct  inaccuracies  and  in- 
consistencies. The  committee  has  made  no  intentional  change  of 
substance. 

Accompanying  this  report  is  a  draft  of  the  present  constitution 
incorporating  all  of  the  amendments  made  by  this  convention  and 
embodying  all  of  the  changes  above  indicated.  This  draft  of  the 
constitution  is  preceded  by  an  index  of  the  articles  giving  the 
subject  of  each  and  is  followed  by  a  schedule  showing  the  source  of 
the  various  articles  of  the  proposed  constitution,  the  distribution  of 
the  sections  of  the  present  constitution  and  also  the  source  of  the 
sections  of  the  proposed  constitution  marked  Schedules  A,  B  and  C. 

In  pursuance  of  the  rules  of  the  convention  and  the  resolutions 
adopted  by  the  convention,  the  committee  has  directed  the  prepara- 
tion of  an  original  draft  of  the  proposed  constitution  on  parchment 
and  also  has  under  preparation  copies  from  the  original  plates 
which  will  be  suitably  bound  and  delivered  to  the  members  of  the 
convention  as  soon  as  it  can  be  done. 

The  list  of  articles  preceding  the  draft  of  the  constitution  and 
the  schedules  following  it  have  been  submitted  merely  for  the 
convenience  of  the  members  of  the  convention  and  form  no  part  of 
the  original  draft  of  the  constitution  reported  by  the  committee. 

We  desire  to  express  our  appreciation  for  the  valuable  services 
of  Mr.  Benton  S.  Rude,  the  parliamentary  draftsman  attached  to 
the  committee,  and  to  George  W.  Munson,  its  stenographer,  and 
also  for  faithful  services  of  Charles  II.  Clark,  who  has  been  in  the 
service  of  the  committee  during  the  past  few  weeks,  and  to 
Frederick  D.  Colson  and  John  T.  Fitzpatrick,  who  have  assisted 
the  committee  in  the  reading  of  the  proofs. 

Respectfully  submitted, 

AdOLPK   J.   RoDENBKCK, 

Chairman 
Lemuel  E.  Quigg, 
William  S.   Ostrander, 
Charles  H.  Betts, 
William  R.  Bates, 
Harry  W.  Newburger, 
Timothy  A.  Leary. 

Committee. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN   CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  52 


THE  PRESENT  CONSTITUTION  OF  THE  STATE  OF 
NEW  YORK,  WITH  THE  AMENDMENTS  THERETO, 
ADOPTED  BY  THE  CONVENTION  OF  1915,  PROPERLY 
INSERTED,  REPORTED  BY  THE  COMMITTEE  ON 
REVISION  AND  ENGROSSMENT  PURSUANT  TO  THE 
RULES  OF  THE  CONVENTION  AND  RESOLUTIONS 
ADOPTED  SEPTEMBER  4,  1915 


INDEX  TO 

ARTICLES 

No. 

Subject 

No. 

Subject 

I. 

Civil   rights. 

XL 

Corporations;           municipal 

II. 

Elective  franchise. 

debts;     boards    and     com 

III. 

Legislature. 

missions. 

IV. 

Executive. 

XI T. 

Education. 

V. 

Appropriations  and 

budget. 

XIII. 

Officers  generally. 

VI. 

State  departments. 

XIV. 

Military. 

VII. 

Conservation. 

XV. 

Cities  and  villages. 

VIII. 

Judiciary. 

XVI. 

Official  corruption. 

IX. 

State  debts. 

XVII. 

Constitutional  amendments. 

X. 

Taxation. 

XVIII. 

Time  of  taking  effect. 

We,  the  people  of  the  State  of  New  York,  grateful  to  Almighty 
God  for  our  freedom,  in  order  to  secure  its  blessings,  do  establish 
tliis  Constitution. 

ARTICLE  I. 

Section  1.  No  member  of  this  state  shall  be  disfranchised,  or 
deprived  of  any  of  the  rights  or  privileges  secured  to  any  citizen 
thereof,  unless  by  the  law  of  the  land,  or  the  judgment  of  his  peers. 


Doc.  No.  52  2  Article  I 

Section  2.  The  trial  by  jury  in  all  cases  in  which  it  has  been 
heretofore  used  shall  remain  inviolate  forever;  but  a  jury  trial 
may  be  waived  by  the  parties  in  all  civil  cases  in  the  manner  to 
be  prescribed  by  law. 

Section  3.  The  free  exercise  and  enjoyment  of  religious  pro- 
fession and  worship,  without  discrimination  or  preference,  shall 
forever  be  allowed  in  this  state  to  all  mankind;  and  no  person 
shall  be  rendered  incompetent  to  be  a  witness  on  account  of  his 
opinions  on  matters  of  religious  belief;  but  the  liberty  of  con- 
science hereby  secured  shall  not  be  so  construed  as  to  excuse  acts 
of  licentiousness,  or  justify  practices  inconsistent  with  the  peace  or 
safety  of  this  state. 

Section  4.  The  privilege  of  the  writ  of  habeas  corpus  shall  not 
be  suspended,  unless  when,  in  cases  of  rebellion  or  invasion,  the 
public  safety  may  require  its  suspension. 

Section  5.  Excessive  bail  shall  not  be  required  nor  excessive 
fines  imposed,  nor  shall  cruel  and  unusual  punishments  be  in- 
flicted, nor  shall  witnesses  be  unreasonably  detained. 

Section  6.  Except  in  cases  of  impeachment,  and  in  cases  of 
militia  when  in  actual  service,  and  the  land  and  naval  forces  in 
time  of  war,  or  which  this  state  may  keep  with  the  consent  of 
congress  in  time  of  peace,  and  in  cases  of  petit  larceny,  under 
the  regulation  of  the  legislature,  no  person  shall  be  held  to 
answer  for  a  capital  or  otherwise  infamous  crime  unless  on  pre- 
sentment or  indictment  of  a  grand  jury.  Any  person  may,  how- 
ever, in  the  manner  prescribed  by  law  after  examination  or  com- 
mitment by  a  magistrate,  waive  indictment  and  trial  by  jury  on 
a  charge  of  felony  punishable  by  not  exceeding  five  years  imprison- 
ment, or  of  an  indictable  misdemeanor,  all  subsequent  proceed- 
ings being  had  by  information  before  a  superior  court  of  criminal 
jurisdiction  or  a  judge  or  justice  thereof.  In  any  trial  in  any  court 
whatever  the  party  accused  shall  be  allowed  to  appear  and 
defend  in  person  and  with  counsel  as  in  civil  actions,  and  in 
any  criminal  case  shall  have  the  right  to  at  least  one  ap- 
peal. No  person  shall  be  subject  to  be  twice  put  in  jeopardy 
for  the  same  offense;  nor  shall  he  be  compelled  in  any  criminal 
case  to  be  a  witness  against  himself;  nor  be  deprived  of  life, 
liberty  or  property  without  due  process  of  law;  nor  be  denied  the 
equal  protection  of  the  laws;  nor  shall  private  property  be  taken 
for  public  use  without  just  compensation. 


Article  I  3  Doc.  No.  52 

Section  7.  (a)  When  private  property  shall  be  taken  for  any 
public  use,  the  compensation  to  be  made  therefor,  when  such 
compensation  is  not  made  by  the  state,  shall  be  ascertained  by 
the  supreme  court  without  a  jury,  but  not  with  a  referee,  or  by 
one  or  more  supreme  court  commissioners  or,  within  the  third  and 
fourth  judicial  departments  and  such  part  of  the  second  judicial 
department  not  within  the  city  of  New  York  by  not  less  than 
three  commissioners  appointed  by  a  court  of  record,  as  shall  be 
prescribed  by  law.  Where  the  proceedings  are  instituted  by  a 
civil  division  of  the  state,  compensation  shall  be  paid  before  such 
taking,  unless  the  supreme  court,  after  hearing,  because  of  public 
necessity  shall  otherwise  direct. 

(b)  Private  roads  may  be  opened  in  the  manner  to  be  pre- 
scribed by  law;  but  in  every  case  the  necessity  of  the  road  and 
the  amount  of  all  damage  to  be  sustained  by  the  opening  thereof 
shall  be  first  determined  by  a  jury  of  freeholders,  and  such 
amount,  together  with  the  expenses  of  the  proceeding,  shall  be 
paid  by  the  person  to  be  benefited. 

(c)  General  laws  may  be  passed  permitting  the  owners  or 
occupants  of  swamp  or  agricultural  lands  to  construct  and  main- 
tain for  the  drainage  thereof,  necessary  drains,  ditches  and  dikes 
upon  the  lands  of  others,  under  proper  restrictions  on  making 
just  compensation,  which  shall  be  assessed  against  the  property 
benefited  thereby. 

(d)  The  legislature  may  authorize  cities  to  take  more  land 
and  property  than  is  needed  for  actual  construction  in  the  laying 
out,  widening,  extending  or  relocating  parks,  public  places,  high- 
ways or  streets ;  provided,  however,  that  the  additional  land  and 
property  so  authorized  to  be  taken  shall  be  no  more  than  sufficient 
to  form  suitable  building  sites  abutting  on  such  park,  public 
place,  highway  or  street.  After  so  much  of  the  land  and  property 
has  been  appropriated  for  such  park,  public  place,  highway  or 
street  as  is  needed  therefor,  the  remainder  may  be  sold  or  leased. 
The  legislature  may  also  authorize  cities,  for  the  establishment  of 
a  uniform  system  of  streets,  to  take  real  property  within  an  aban- 
doned street  or  highway  and  to  sell  and  lease  it. 

Section  8.  Every  citizen  may  freely  speak,  write  and  publish 
his  sentiments  on  all  subjects,  being  responsible  for  the  abuse  of 
that  right;  and  no  law  shall  be  passed  to  restrain  or  abridge  the 
liberty  of  speech  or  of  the  press.  In  all  criminal  prosecutions  or 
indictments  for  libels,  the  truth  may  be  given  in  evidence  to  the 


Doc.  No.   52  4  Article  I 

jury;  and  if  it  shall  appear  to  the  jury  that  the  matter  charged 
as  libelous  is  true,  and  was  published  with  good  motives  and  for 
justifiable  ends,  the  party  shall  be  acquitted ;  and  the  jury  shall 
have  the  right  to  determine  the  law  and  the  fact. 

Section  9.  No  law  shall  be  passed  abridging  the  right  of  the 
people  peaceably  to  assemble  and  to  petition  the  government,  or 
any  department  thereof;  nor  shall  any  divorce  be  granted  other- 
wise than  by  due  judicial  proceedings;  nor  shall  any  lottery  or 
the  sale  of  lottery  tickets,  pool-selling,  book-making,  or  any  other 
kind  of  gambling  hereafter  be  authorized  or  allowed  within  this 
state ;  and  the  legislature  shall  pass  appropriate  laws  to  prevent 
offenses  against  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  section. 

Section  10.  The  people  of  this  state,  in  their  right  of  sover- 
eignty, are  deemed  to  possess  the  original  and  ultimate  property 
in  and  to  all  lands  within  the  jurisdiction  of  the  state;  and  all 
lands  the  title  to  which  shall  fail,  from  a  defect  of  heirs,  shall 
revert,  or  escheat  to  the  people. 

Section  11.  All  feudal  tenures  of  every  description,  with  all 
their  incidents,  are  declared  to  be  abolished,  saving  however,  all 
rents  and  services  certain  which  at  any  time  heretofore  have  been 
lawfully  created  or  reserved. 

Section  12.  All  lands  within  this  state  are  declared  to  be 
allodial,  so  that,  subject  only  to  the  liability  to  escheat,  the  entire 
and  absolute  property  is  vested  in  the  owners,  according  to  the 
nature  of  their  respective  estates. 

Section  13.  No  lease  or  grant  of  agricultural  land,  for  a  longer 
period  than  twelve  years,  hereafter  made,  in  which  shall  be  re- 
served any  rent  or  service  of  any  kind,  shall  be  valid. 

Section  14.  All  fines,  quarter  sales,  or  other  like  restraints 
upon  alienation,  reserved  in  any  grant  of  land  hereafter  to  be 
made,  shall  be  void. 

Section  15.  No  purchase  or  contract  fur  the  sale  of  lands  in 
this  state,  made  since  the  fourteenth  day  of  October,  one  thousand 
seven  hundred  and  seventy-five;  or  which  may  hereafter  be  made, 
of,  or  with  the  Indians,  shall  be  valid  unless  made  under  the  au- 
thority, and  with  the  consent  of  the  legislature.  The  peace- 
makers' courts  of  the  Tonawanda  nation,  the  peacemakers'  courts 
and  surrogates'  courts  of  the  Seneca  nation  and  ;ill  other  agencies 
of  the  Indian  tribes  and  nations  in  so  far  as  they  exercise  judicial 


Article  I  5  Doc.  No.   52 

functions  are  hereby  abolished,  and  their  jurisdiction  shall  vest  in 
the  courts  of  the  state.  All  actions  and  proceedings  now  pending 
in  such  courts  and  agencies  of  the  Indian  nations  and  tribes  shall 
be  transferred  for  determination  to  the  proper  courts  of  the  state. 
Except  as  otherwise  provided  by  the  treaties  of  this  state  and  the 
constitution,  treaties  and  laws  of  the  United  States,  all  general 
laws  of  the  state,  now  or  hereafter  in  force,  shall  apply  to  all  In- 
dians within  the  state.  The  legislature  shall  provide  for  the  pre- 
servation of  the  judicial  records  of  the  Indian  tribes  and  nations. 

Section  16.  Such  parts  of  the  common  law,  and  of  the  acts  of 
the  legislature  of  the  colony  of  New  York,  as  together  did  form 
the  law  of  such  colony,  on  the  nineteenth  day  of  April,  one 
thousand  seven  hundred  and  seventy-five,  and  the  resolutions  of 
the  congress  of  such  colony,  and  of  the  convention  of  the 
state  of  New  York,  in  force  on  the  twentieth  day  of  April, 
one  thousand  seven  hundred  and  seventy-seven,  which  have  not 
since  expired,  or  been  repealed  or  altered;  and  such  acts  of  the 
legislature  of  this  state  as  are  now  in  force,  shall  be  and  con- 
tinue the  law  of  this  state,  subject  to  such  alterations  as  the 
legislature  shall  make  concerning  the  same.  But  all  such  parts 
of  the  common  law,  and  such  of  the  said  acts,  or  parts  thereof, 
as  are  repugnant  to  this  constitution,  are  hereby  abrogated. 

Section  17.  All  grants  of  land  within  this  state,  made  by  the 
king  of  Great  Britain,  or  persons  acting  under  his  authority, 
after  the  fourteenth  day  of  October,  one  thousand  seven  hundred 
and  seventy-five,  shall  be  null  and  void ;  but  nothing  contained  in 
this  constitution  shall  affect  any  grants  of  land  within  this  state, 
made  by  the  authority  of  the  said  king  or  his  predecessors,  or  shall 
annul  any  charters  to  bodies  politic  and  corporate,  by  him  or  them 
made,  before  that  day ;  or  shall  affect  any  such  grants  or  charters 
since  made  by  this  state,  or  by  persons  acting  under  its  authority ; 
or  shall  impair  the  obligation  of  any  debts  contracted  by  the  state, 
or  individuals,  or  bodies  corporate,  or  any  other  rights  of  prop- 
erty, or  any  suits,  actions,  rights  of  action,  or  other  proceedings 
in  courts  of  justice. 

Section  18.  Except  in  the  cases  provided  for  in  the  next  section, 
the  right  of  action  now  existing  to  recover  damages  for  injuries 
resulting  in  death  shall  never  be  abrogated  and  the  amount  re- 
coverable shall  not  be  subject  to  any  statutory  limitation. 


Doc.   No.   52  6  Article  I 

Section  19.  Nothing  contained  in  this  constitution  shall  be 
construed  to  limit  the  power  of  the  legislature  to  enact  laws  for 
the  protection  of  the  lives,  health  or  safety  of  employees;  or  for 
the  payment,  either  by  employers,  or  by  employers  and  employees 
or  otherwise,  either  directly  or  through  a  state  or  other  system  of 
insurance  or  otherwise,  of  compensation  for  injuries  to  or  occupa- 
tional diseases  of  employees  or  for  death  of  employees  resulting 
from  such  injuries  or  diseases  without  regard  to  fault  as  a  cause 
thereof,  except  where  the  injury  is  occasioned  by  the  wilful  inten- 
tion of  the  injured  employee  to  bring  about  the  injury  or  death  of 
himself  or  of  another,  or  where  the  injury  results  solely  from  the 
intoxication  of  the  injured  employee  while  on  duty ;  or  for  the  ad- 
justment, determination  and  settlement,  with  or  without  trial  by 
jury,  of  issues  which  may  arise  under  such  legislation;  or  pro- 
viding that  the  right  to  such  compensation,  and  the  remedy 
therefor  shall  be  exclusive  of  all  other  rights  and  remedies  for 
such  injuries  or  diseases  or  death.  But  all  moneys  paid  by  an 
employer,  by  reason  of  the  enactment  of  any  of  the  laws  herein 
authorized,  shall  be  deemed  a  part  of  the  cost  of  operating  the 
business  of  the  employer. 

ARTICLE   II. 

Section  1.  Every  male  citizen  of  the  age  of  twenty-one  years, 
who  shall  have  been  a  citizen  for  ninety  days,  and  an  inhabitant 
of  this  state  one  year  next  preceding  an  election,  and  for  the 
last  four  months  a  resident .  of  the  county  and  for  the  last 
thirty  days  a  resident  of  the  election  district  in  which  he  may 
offer  his  vote,  .shall  be  entitled  to  vote  at  such  election  in  the 
election  district  of  which  he  shall  at  the  time  be  a  resident,  and 
not  elsewhere,  for  all  officers  that  now  are  or  hereafter  may  be 
elective  by  the  people;  and  upon  all  questions  which  may  be 
submitted  to  the  vote  of  the  people,  provided  that  in  time  of  war 
no  elector  in  the  actual  military  service  of  the  state,  or  of  the 
United  States,  in  the  army  or  navy  thereof,  shall  be  deprived  of 
his  vote  by  reason  of  his  absence  from  such  election  district ;  and 
the  legislature  shall  have  power  to  provide  the  manner  in  which 
and  the  time  and  place  at  which  such  absent  electors  may  vote, 
and  for  the  return  and  canvass  of  their  votes  in  the  election  dis- 
tricts in  which  they  respectively  reside. 

Section  2.  ISTo  person  who  shall  receive,  accept,  or  offer  to  receive, 
or  pay,  offer  or  promise  to  pay,  contribute,  offer  or  promise  to 


Article  II  7  Doc.  No.   52 

contribute  to  another,  to  be  paid  or  used,  any  money  or  other 
valuable  thing  as  a  compensation  or  reward  for  the  giving  or 
withholding  a  vote  at  an  election,  or  who  shall  make  any  promise 
to  influence  the  giving  or  withholding  any  such  vote,  or  who  shall 
make  or  become  directly  or  indirectly  interested  in  any  bet 
or  wager  depending  upon  the  result  of  any  election,  shall  vote  at 
such  election ;  and  upon  challenge  for  such  cause,  the  person  so 
challenged,  before  the  officers  authorized  for  that  purpose  shall 
receive  his  vote,  shall  swear  or  affirm  before  such  officers  that  he 
has  not  received  or  offered,  does  not  expect  to  receive,  has  not 
paid,  offered  or  promised  to  pay,  contributed,  offered  or  promised 
to  contribute  to  another,  to  be  paid  or  used,  any  money  or  other 
valuable  thing  as  a  compensation  or  reward  for  the  giving  or 
withholding  a  vote  at  such  election,  and  has  not  made  any  promise 
to  influence  the  giving  or  withholding  of  any  such  vote,  nor  made 
or  become  directly  or  indirectly  interested  in  any  bet  or  wager 
depending  upon  the  result  of  such  election.  The  legislature  shall 
enact  laws  excluding  from  the  right  of  suffrage  all  persons  con- 
victed of  bribery  or  of  any  infamous  crime. 

Section  3.  For  the  purpose  of  voting,  no  person  shall  be  deemed 
to  have  gained  or  lost  a  residence,  by  reason  of  his  presence  or 
absence,  while  employed  in  the  service  of  the  United  States ;  nor 
while  engaged  in  the  navigation  of  the  waters  of  this  state,  or  of 
the  United  States,  or  of  the  high  seas;  nor  while  a  student  of  any 
seminary  of  learning;  nor  while  kept  at  any  alms-house,  or  other 
asylum,  or  institution  wholly  or  partly  supported  at  public  ex- 
pense, or  by  charity;  nor  while  confined  in  any  public  prison. 

Section  4.  Laws  shall  be  made  for  the  regulation  of  elections 
and  for  ascertaining  by  proper  proofs  the  electors  who  shall  be 
entitled  to  the  right  of  suffrage  hereby  established  and  for  their 
annual  registration,  which  shall  be  completed  at  least  fifteen  days 
before  each  general  election.  Such  registration  shall  not  be  re- 
quired for  town  and  village  elections  except  by  express  provision 
of  law.  In  cities  and  villages  having  five  thousand  inhabitants 
or  more,  according  to  the  last  preceding  federal  or  state  census  or 
enumeration,  electors  shall  be  registered  upon  personal  application 
only.  Laws  may  be  made  providing  for  special  registration 
therein  on  personal  application  before  such  boards  or  officers  as 
the  legislature  shall  designate,  on  a  day  or  days  not  more  than 
five  months  prior  to  the  day  of  election,  of  such  electors  as  shall 
then  declare  under  oath  that  they  are  engaged  in  a  regular  voca- 
tion or  occupation  which  will  occasion  their  absence  from  the 


Doc.  No.  52  8  Article   11 

county  during  each  of  the  regular  days  of  registration.  Such  laws 
shall  require  electors  so  specially  registered  to  establish,  on  the 
first  regular  day  of  registration,  their  continued  right  to  vote  in 
the  election  district  for  which  they  were  registered  but  shall  not 
require  further  personal  appearance.  Electors  not  residing  in 
such  cities  or  villages  shall  not  be  required  to  apply  in  person  for 
registration  at  the  first  meeting  of  the  officers  having  charge  of 
the  registry  of  electors. 

Section  5.  All  elections  by  the  citizens,  except  for  such  town 
officers  as  may  by  law  be  directed  to  be  otherwise  chosen,  shall  be 
by  ballot,  or  by  such  other  method  as  may  be  prescribed  by  law, 
provided  that  secrecy  in  voting  be  preserved. 

Section  6.  All  laws  creating,  regulating  or  affecting  boards  or 
officers  charged  with  the  duty  of  registering  electors,  or  of  distribut- 
ing ballots  at  the  polls  to  electors,  or  of  receiving,  recording  or 
counting  votes  at  elections,  shall  secure  equal  representation  of 
the  two  political  parties  which,  at  the  general  election  next  preced- 
ing that  for  which  such  boards  or  officers  are  to  serve,  cast  the 
highest  and  the  next  highest  number  of  votes.  All  such  boards 
and  officers  shall  be  appointed  or  elected  in  such  manner,  and 
upon  the  nomination  of  such  representatives  of  such  parties  re- 
spectively, as  the  legislature  may  direct.  Existing  laws  on  this 
subject  shall  continue  until  the  legislature  shall  otherwise  pro- 
vide. This  section  shall  not  apply  to  town  meetings  or  to  vil- 
lage elections. 

AETICLE  III. 

Section  1.  The  legislative  power  of  this  state  shall  be  vested 
in  the  senate  and  assembly. 

Section  2.  The  senate  shall  consist  of  fifty  members  except  as 
hereinafter  provided.  They  shall  be  chosen  for  two  years.  The 
assembly  shall  consist  of  one  hundred  and  fifty  members,  who  shall 
be  chosen  for  one  year. 

Section  3.  The  state  shall  be  divided  into  fifty  districts  to  be 
called  senate  districts,  each  of  which  shall  choose  one  senator.  The 
districts  shall  be  numbered  from  one  to  fifty,  inclusive.  The 
senate  districts  shall  remain  as  at  present  constituted  until  altered 
as  hereinafter  provided. 

Section  4.  Such  senate  districts  shall  be  so  altered  by  fche  legis- 
lature at  the  first  regular  session  after  the  return  of  and  based 
upon  the  state  enumeration  taken  in  the  year  one  thousand   nine 


Article  III  9  Doc.  No.  52 

hundred  and  fifteen  and  shall  remain  unaltered  until  altered  as 
hereinafter  provided.  At  the  regular  session  of  the  legislature  in 
the  year  after  the  tabulation  of  each  federal  census  the  senate  dis- 
tricts shall  be  altered  by  the  legislature.  Senate  districts  altered 
as  herein  provided  shall  remain  unaltered  until  the  time  herein 
appointed  for  another  alteration.  Provided,  however,  that  if  a 
federal  census  shall  not  be  available  for  any  such  alteration  the 
same  shall  be  based  upon  an  enumeration  of  the  inhabitants  of  the 
state,  excluding  aliens,  and  the  legislature  shall  provide  for  such 
an  enumeration  for  that  purpose.  In  making  such  alterations  the 
legislature  shall  so  provide  that  each  senate  district  shall  contain 
as  nearly  as  may  be  an  equal  number  of  inhabitants,  excluding 
aliens,  and  be  in  as  compact  form  as  practicable  and  shall,  at  all 
times,  consist  of  contiguous  territory,  and  no  county  shall  be  di- 
vided in  the  formation  of  a  senate  district  except  to  make  two,  or 
more,  senate  districts  wholly  in  such  county. 

No  town  and  no  block  in  a  city  inclosed  by  streets  or  public 
ways  shall  be  divided  in  the  formation  of  senate  districts;  nor 
shall  any  district  contain  a  greater  excess  in  population  over  an 
adjoining  district  in  the  same  county  than  the  population  of  a 
town  or  block  therein  adjoining  such  district.  Counties,  towns  or 
blocks  which,  from  their  location,  may  be  included  in  either  of  two 
districts,  shall  be  so  placed  as  to  make  such  districts  most  nearly 
equal  in  number  of  inhabitants,  excluding  aliens.  No  county  shall 
have  four  or  more  senators  unless  it  shall  have  a  full  ratio  for 
each  senator.  No  county  shall  have  more  than  one-third  of  all  the 
senators ;  and  no  two  counties  or  the  territory  thereof  as  or- 
ganized on  the  first  day  of  January,  one  thousand  eight  hundred 
and  ninety-five,  which  are  adjoining  counties  or  which  are  sepa- 
rated only  by  public  waters  shall  have  more  than  one-half  of  all 
the  senators.  The  ratio  for  apportioning  senators  shall  always  be 
obtained  by  dividing  the  number  of  inhabitants,  excluding  aliens, 
by  fifty  and  the  senate  shall  always  be  composed  of  fifty  mem- 
bers, except  that  if  any  county  having  three  or  more  senators 
at  the  time  of  any  apportionment  shall  be  entitled  on  such 
ratio  to  an  additional  senator  or  senators,  such  additional  sena- 
tor or  senators  shall  be  given  to  such  county  in  addition  to  the 
fifty  senators,  and  the  whole  number  of  senators  shall  be  increased 
to  that  extent. 

Section  5.  The  members  of  the  assembly  shall  be  chosen  by 
single  districts  and  shall  be  apportioned  by  the  legislature  at  the 
first  regular  session  after  the  return  of  the  state  enumeration  taken 


Doc.  No.   52  10  Article  III 

in  the  year  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  fifteen  among  the 
several  counties  of  the  state.  At  the  regular  session  of  the  legisla- 
ture in  each  year  in  which  senate  districts  shall  he  altered  such 
members  of  the  assembly  shall  again  he  apportioned  by  the  legis- 
lature. Apportionments  of  members  of  assembly  shall  remain  un- 
altered until  the  time  herein  appointed  for  another  apportionment 
thereof.  Every  apportionment  of  members  among  the  several 
counties  of  the  state  shall  be  as  nearly  as  may  be  according  to  the 
number  of  their  respective  inhabitants,  excluding  aliens. 

Every  county  heretofore  established  and  separately  organized, 
except  the  county  of  Hamilton,  shall  always  be  entitled  to  one 
member  of  assembly,  and  no  county  shall  hereafter  be  erected 
unless  its  population  shall  entitle  it  to  a  member.  The  county  of 
Hamilton  shall  elect  with  the  county  of  Fulton  until  the  popula- 
tion of  the  county  of  Hamilton  shall,  according  to  the  ratio,  en- 
title it  to  a  member. 

The  quotient  obtained  by  dividing  the  whole  number  of  in- 
habitants of  the  state,  excluding  aliens,  by  the  number  of  members 
of  assembly,  shall  be  the  ratio  for  apportionment  which  shall  be 
made  as  follows :  one  member  of  assembly  shall  be  apportioned  to 
every  county,  including  Fulton  and  Hamilton  as  one  county, 
containing  less  than  the  ratio  and  one-half  over.  Two  members 
shall  be  apportioned  to  every  other  county.  The  remaining  mem- 
bers of  assembly  shall  be  apportioned  to  the  counties  having  more 
than  two  ratios  according  to  the  number  of  inhabitants,  excluding 
aliens.  Members  apportioned  on  remainders  shall  be  apportioned 
to  the  counties  having  the  highest  remainders  in  the  order  thereof 
respectively.  No  county  shall  have  more  members  of  assembly 
than  a  county  having  a  greater  number  of  inhabitants,  excluding 
aliens. 

In  any  county  entitled  to  more  than  one  member,  the  board  of 
supervisors  or  if  there  be  none,  the  board  or  body  exercising 
similar  functions,  and  in  any  city  embracing  an  entire  county,  or 
more  than  one  county,  and  having  no  board  of  supervisors,  the 
members  elected  from  each  county  to  the  board  of  aldermen  or 
if  there  be  none,  the  body  most  nearly  exercising  the  powers  of  a 
board  of  aldermen  shall  assemble  on  the  second  Tuesday  of  June, 
one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  sixteen,  and  at  such  other  times 
as  the  legislature  thereafter  making  an  apportionment,  as  herein- 
after provided,  shall  prescribe,  and  divide  each  comity  into 
assembly  districts  as  nearly  equal  in  number  of  inhabitants,  ex- 
cluding aliens,  as  may  be,  of  convenient  and  contiguous  territory 
in  as  compact  Eorm  as  practicable,  each  of  which  shall  be  wholly 


Article  III  11  Doc.  No.  52 

within  a  senate  district  formed  under  the  same  apportionment, 
equal  to  the  number  of  members  of  assembly  to  which  such  county 
shall  be-  entitled,  and  shall  cause  to  be  hied  in  the  office  of  the 
secretary  of  state  and  of  the  clerk  of  such  county,  a  description 
of  such  districts,  specifying  the  number  of  each  district  and  of 
the  inhabitants  thereof,  excluding  aliens,  according  to  the  last 
preceding  state  enumeration,  or  if  no  state  enumeration  shall 
have  been  taken  within  a  period  of  five  years  prior  to  such  appor- 
tionment, then  according  to  the  preceding  federal  census;  and 
such  apportionment  and  districts  shall  remain  unaltered  until 
another  federal  census  shall  be  made.  In  counties  having  more 
than  one  senate  district,  the  same  number  of  assembly  districts 
shall  be  put  in  each  senate  district,  unless  the  assembly  districts 
cannot  be  evenly. divided  among  the  senate  districts  of  any  county, 
in  which  case  one  more  assembly  district  shall  be  put  in  the 
senate  district  in  such  county  having  the  largest,  or  one  less 
assembly  district  shall  be  put  in  the  senate  district  in  such  county 
having  the  smallest  number  of  inhabitants,  excluding  aliens,  as 
the  case  may  require.  No  town,  and  no  block  in  a  city  inclosed  by 
streets  or  public  ways,  shall  be  divided  in  the  formation  of 
assembly  districts,  nor  shall  any  district  contain  a  greater  excess 
in  population  over  an  adjoining  district  in  the  same  senate 
district  than  the  population  of  a  town  or  block  therein  adjoining 
such  assembly  district.  Towns  or  blocks  which  from  their  loca- 
tion may  be  included  in  either  of  two  assembly  districts  shall  be 
so  placed  as  to  make  such  assembly  districts  most  nearly  equal  in 
number  of  inhabitants,  excluding  aliens.  But  in  the  division  of 
cities  except  cities  of  the  first  class  under  the  first  apportionment, 
regard  shall  be  had  to  the  number  of  inhabitants,  excluding 
aliens,  of  the  election  districts  according  to  the  state  enumeration 
of  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  fifteen,  so  far  as  may  be,  in- 
stead of  blocks.  Nothing  in  this  section  shall  prevent  the  division 
at  any  time  of  counties  and  towns  and  the  erection  of  new  counties 
and  towns  by  the  legislature.  Assembly  districts  as  at  present  con- 
stituted shall  remain  unaltered  until  altered  as  herein  provided. 
An  apportionment  by  the  legislature  or  other  body  shall  be 
subject  to  review  by  the  supreme  court  at  the  suit  of  any  citizen, 
under  such  reasonable  regulations  as  the  legislature  may  pre- 
scribe; and  any  court  before  which  a  cause  may  be  pending  in- 
volving an  apportionment  shall  give  precedence  thereto  over  all 


Doc.   No.  52  12  Article  III 

other  causes  and  proceedings,  and  if  such  court  be  not  in  session 
it  shall  convene  promptly  for  the  disposition  of  the  same. 

Section  G.  The  elections  of  senators  and  members  of  assembly, 
pursuant  to  the  provisions  of  this  constitution,  shall  be  held  on 
the  Tuesday  succeeding  the  first  Monday  of  November,  unless 
otherwise  directed  by  the  legislature. 

Section  7.  The  political  year  and  legislative  term  shall  begin 
on  the  first  day  of  January ;  and  the  legislature  shall,  every  year, 
assemble  on  the  first  Wednesday  in  January. 

Section  8.  Each  member  of  the  legislature  shall  receive  for  his 
services  an  annual  salary  of  two  thousand  five  hundred  dollars. 
The  members  of  each  house  shall  also  receive  the  railroad  fare  ac- 
tually paid  in  going  to  and  returning  from  their,  place  of  meeting 
on  the  most  usual  route,  but  not  oftener  than  once  each  week  during 
any  session  of  the  legislature.  Such  railroad  fare  shall  be  repaid 
only  on  the  verified  voucher  of  the  member  entitled  thereto  after 
audit  by  the  comptroller.  Senators,  when  the  senate  alone  is 
convened  in  extraordinary  session,  or  when  serving  as  members 
of  the  court  for  the  trial  of  impeachments,  and  such  members  of 
the  assembly,  not  exceeding  nine  in  number,  as  shall  be  appointed 
managers  of  an  impeachment,  shall  receive  an  additional  allow- 
ance of  ten  dollars  a  day. 

Section  9.  A  majority  of  the  members  elected  to  each  house 
shall  constitute  a  quorum  to  do  business.  Each  house  shall  de- 
termine the  rules  of  its  own  proceedings  and  be  the  judge  of  the 
elections,  returns  and  qualifications  of  its  own  members  and  shall 
choose  its  own  officers.  The  senate  shall  choose  a  temporary 
president.  The  assembly  shall  choose  a  speaker.  If  the  lieutenant- 
governor  become  governor,  the  temporary  president  shall  become 
lieutenant-governor  for  the  remainder  of  the  term.  If  the  lieu- 
tenant-governor be  impeached  or  be  unable  to  discharge  the  duties 
of  the  office  or  be  acting  governor,  the  temporary  president  shall 
act  as  lieutenant-governor  during  such  impeachment  or  inability  or 
while  the  lieutenant-governor  is  acting  governor.  If  the  lieutenant- 
governor  refuse  to  act  as  president  or  be  absent  from  the  chair. 
the  temporary  president  shall  preside.  If  the  speaker  of  the  ;is 
sembly  be  unable  to  perform  the  duties  of  the  office  or  be  acting 
governor,  the  assembly  may  choose  :i  temporary  speaker  who  sluill 
act  as  speaker  during  such  inability  or  while  the  speaker  is  acting 
governor  or  until  ;i  speaker  is  chosen. 


Article  lit  13  Doc.  No.  52 

Section  10.  The  legislature  of  its  own  motion,  in  the  man- 
ner to  be  provided  by  joint  rule  which  shall  continue  in  force 
until  abrogated  or  amended  by  both  the  senate  and  the  assembly, 
may  convene  to  take  action  in  the  matter  of  removal  of  a  judge  of 
the  court  of  appeals  or  justice  of  the  supreme  court.  The  assem- 
bly of  its  own  motion,  in  the  manner  to  be  provided  by  rule  which 
shall  continue  in  force  until  abrogated  or  amended  by  the  assem- 
bly, may  convene  for  the  purposes  of  impeachment.  At  a  meet- 
ing under  this  section  no  subject  shall  be  acted  upon  except  that 
for  which  the  meeting  is  herein  authorized  to  be  held. 

Section  11.  If  any  person  shall,  after  his  election  as  a  member 
of  the  legislature,  be  elected  to  congress,  or  appointed  to  any  office, 
civil  or  military,  under  the  government  of  the  United  States,  or 
under  any  city  government,  his  acceptance  thereof  shall  vacate 
his  seat. 

Section  12.  Each  house  shall  keep  a  journal  of  its  proceedings 
and  a  record  of  its  debates  and  promptly  publish  the  same  from 
day  to  day,  except  such  parts  as  may  require  secrecy.  The  doors 
of  each  house  shall  be  kept  open,  except  when  the  public  welfare 
shall  require  secrecy.  Neither  house  shall,  without  the  consent 
of  the  other,  adjourn  for  more  than  two  days. 

Section  13.  For  any  speech  or  debate  in  either  house  of  the 
legislature,  the  members  shall  not  lie  questioned  in  any  other  place. 

Section  14.  Any  bill  may  originate  in  either  house  of  the  legis- 
lature, and  all  bills  passed  by  one  house  may  be  amended  by  the 
other. 

Section  15.  The  enacting  clause  of  all  bills  shall  be  "  The 
People  of  the  State  of  New  York,  represented  in  Senate  and 
Assembly,  do  enact  as  follows :"  and  no  law  shall  be  enacted  except 
by  bill.  l  ' 

Section  16.  No  bill  shall  be  passed  or  become  a  law  unless  it 
shall  have  been  printed  and  upon  the  desks  of  the  members,  in  its 
final  form,  at  least  three  calendar  legislative  days  prior  to  its  final 
passage.  No  bill  shall  be  passed  or  become  a  law,  except  by  the 
assent  of  a  majority  of  the  members  elected  to  each  branch  of  the 
legislature.  Immediately  after  the  last  reading  of  a  bill  the 
question  upon  its  final  passage  shall  be  taken  and  the  yeas  and 
nays  entered  on  the  journal. 


Doc    No.  52  14  Article   111 

Section  17.  No  private  or  local  bill,  which  may  be  passed  by  the 
legislature,  shall  embrace  more  than  one  subject,  and  that  shall 
be  expressed  in  the  title. 

Section  18.  No  act  shall  be  passed  which  shall  provide  that  any 
existing  law,  or  any  part  thereof,  shall  be  made  or  deemed  a  part 
of  such  act,  or  which  shall  enact  that  any  existing  law,  or  part 
thereof,  shall  be  applicable,  except  by  inserting  it  in  such  act. 

Section  19.  The  legislature  shall  not  pass  a  private  or  local 
bill  in  any  of  the  following  cases: 

Changing  the  names  of  persons ; 

Laying  out,  opening,  altering,  working  or  discontinuing  roads, 
highways  or  alleys,  or  for  draining  swamps  or  other  low  lands ; 

Locating  or  changing  county  seats; 

Providing  for  changes  of  venue  in  civil  or  criminal  cases ; 

Incorporating  villages ; 

Providing  for  election  of  members  of  boards  of  supervisors ; 

Selecting,  drawing,  summoning  or  empaneling  grand  or  petit 
jurors ; 

Regulating  the  rate  of  interest  on  money ; 

The  opening  and  conducting  of  elections  or  designating  places 
of  voting; 

Creating,  increasing  or  decreasing  fees,  percentage  or  allow- 
ances of  public  officers,  during  the  term  for  which  such  officers 
are  elected  or  appointed; 

Granting  to  any  corporation,  association  or  individual  the  right 
to  prove  a  claim  against  the  state  or  against  any  civil  division 
thereof ; 

Authorizing  any  civil  division  of  the  state  to  allow  or  pay 
any  claim  or  account ; 

Granting  to  any  corporation,  association  or  individual  the  right 
to  lay  down  railroad  tracks ; 

Granting  to  any  private  corporation,  association  or  individual 
any  exclusive  privilege,  immunity  or  franchise  whatever; 

Granting  to  any  person,  association,  firm  or  corporation  an  ex- 
emption from  taxation  on  real  or  personal  property- 
Providing  for  building  bridges,  and  chartering  companies  for 
such  purposes,  except  on  the  Hudson  river  below  Waterford,  and 
on  the  East  river,  or  over  the  waters  forming  a  part  of  the  bound- 
aries of  the  state. 

The  legislature  shall  pass  general  laws  providing  for  the  cases 
enumerated  in  this  section,  and  for  all  other  cases  which  in  its 


Article   III  15  Doc.    No.  52 

judgment,  may  be  provided  for  by  general  laws.  But  no  law 
shall  authorize  the  construction  or  operation  of  a  street  railroad 
except  upon  the  condition  that  the  consent  of  the  owners  of  one- 
half  in  value  of  the  property  bounded  on,  and  the  consent  also  of 
the  local  authorities  having  the  control  of  that  portion  of  a  street 
or  highway  upon  which  it  is  proposed  to  construct  or  operate  such 
railroad  be  first  obtained,  or  in  case  the  consent  of  such  property 
owners  cannot  be  obtained,  the  appellate  division  of  the  supreme 
court,  in  the  department  in  which  it  is  proposed  to  be  constructed, 
may,  upon  application,  appoint  three  commissioners  who  shall  de- 
termine, after  a  hearing  of  all  parties  interested,  whether  such 
railroad  ought  to  be  constructed  or  operated,  and  their  determi- 
nation, confirmed  by  the  court,  may  be  taken  in  lieu  of  the  con- 
sent of  the  property  owners. 

Section  20.  The  legislature  shall  neither  audit  nor  allow  any 
private  claim  or  account  against  the  state  or  against  any  civil 
division  thereof,  but  may  appropriate  money  to  pay  such  claims 
and  accounts  against  the  state  as  shall  have  been  audited  and 
allowed  according  to  law. 

Section  21.  The  assent  of  two-thirds  of  the  members  elected 
to  each  branch  of  the  legislature  shall  be  requisite  to  every  bill 
appropriating  the  public  moneys  or  property  for  local  or  private 
purposes. 

No  public  moneys  or  property  shall  be  appropriated  for 
the  construction  or  improvement  of  any  building,  bridge, 
highway,  dike,  canal,  feeder,  waterway  or  other  work  until  plans 
and  estimates  of  the  cost  of  such  work  shall  have  been  filed  with 
the  secretary  of  state  by  the  superintendent  of  public  works, 
together  with  a  certificate  by  him  as  to  whether  or  not  in  his 
judgment  the  general  interests  of  the  state  then  require  that  such 
improvement  be  made  at  state  expense.  This  section  shall  not 
apply  to  the  contributions  of  the  state  to  the  cost  of  eliminating 
grade  crossings  or  to  items  in  the  budget  for  the  construction  of 
highways  from  the  proceeds  of  bonds  authorized  under  section 
four  of  article  nine  of  this  constitution  or  section  four  of  former 
article  seven  thereof  as  in  force  on  the  first  day  of  January,  one 
thousand  nine  hundred  and  ten. 

Section  22.  No  money  shall  ever  be  paid  out  of  the  treasury  of 
this  state  or  any  of  its  funds,  or  any  of  the  funds  under  its  manage- 
ment, except  in  pursuance  of  an  appropriation  by  law ;  nor  unless 
such  payment  be  made  not  later  than  three  months  after  the  close 


Doc.  Xo.  52  16  Article  III 

of  the  fiscal  year  next  succeeding  that  in  which  such  appropriation 
was  made  ;  and  every  such  law  making  a  new  appropriation  or  con- 
tinuing or  reviving  an  appropriation,  shall  distinctly  specify  the 
sum  appropriated,  and  the  object  to  which  it  is  to  he  applied;  and 
it  shall  not  be  sufficient  for  such  law  to  refer  to  any  other  law  to 
fix  such  sum.  Appropriations  made  by  the  legislature  in  the  year 
one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  sixteen  shall  be  made  for  a  period 
ending  the  thirtieth  day  of  June,  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and 
seventeen,  and  thereafter  the  fiscal  year  of  the  state  shall  end 
on  the  thirtieth  day  of  June  of  each  year,  unless  otherwise  pro- 
vided by  law. 

Section  23.  No  provision  or  enactment  shall  be  embraced  in  the 
annual  appropriation  or  supply  bill,  unless  it  relates  specifically 
to  some  particular  appropriation  in  the  bill;  and  any  such  pro- 
vision or  enactment  shall  be  limited  in  its  operation  to  such  ap- 
propriation. 

Section  24.  Every  law  which  imposes,  continues  or  revives  a 
tax  shall  distinctly  state  the  tax  and  the  object  to  which  it  is  to  be 
applied,  and  it  shall  not  be  sufficient  to  refer  to  any  other  law  to 
fix  such  tax  or  object. 

Section  25.  There  shall  be  in  each  county,  except  in  a  county 
wholly  included  in  a  city,  a  board  of  supervisors,  to  be  composed 
of  such  members  and  elected  in  such  manner  and  for  such  period 
as  is  or  may  be  provided  by  law.  In  a  city  which  includes  an 
entire  county,  or  two  or  more  entire  counties,  the  powers  and 
duties  of  a  board  of  supervisors  may  be  devolved  upon  the  munic- 
ipal assembly,  common  council,  board  of  aldermen  or  other  legis- 
lative body  of  the  city.  Provided,  however,  that  the  legislature, 
by  general  laws,  may  establish  different  forms  of  government  for 
counties  not  wholly  included  in  a  city,  any  such  form  of  govern- 
ment to  become  effective  in  any  county  only  when  approved  by  the 
electors  thereof  in  such  manner  as  the  legislature  may  prescribe. 

No  local  or  special  law  relating  to  a  comity  or  counties  except 
to  a  county  or  counties  wholly  included  within  a  city  shall  be 
enacted  except  upon  request,  by  resolution,  of  the  governing  body 
of  the  county  or  counties  to  be  affected. 

Section  26.  The  legislature  shall,  by  general  laws,  confer  upon 
the  boards  of  supervisors,  or  other  governing  bodies,  of  the  several 
counties  of  the  stale  such  further  powers  of  local  legislation  and 
administration  as  the   legislature  may,  from  time  to  time,  deem 


Article  III  17  Doc.    No.   52 

expedient.  In  counties  which  now  have,  or  may  hereafter  have, 
county  auditors  or  other  fiscal  officers,  authorized  to  audit  bills, 
accounts,  charges,  claims  or  demands  against  the  county,  the 
legislature  may  confer  such  powers  upon  such  auditors,  or  fiscal 
officers,  as  the  legislature  may,  from  time  to  time,  deem  expedient. 
The  legislature  may  confer  upon  any  elective  or  appointive 
county  officer  or  officers  any  of  the  powers  and  duties  now  exer- 
cised by  the  towns  of  any  county  or  the  officer  or  officers  thereof 
relating  to  highways,  public  safety  and  the  care  of  the  poor. 

Section  27.  No  extra  compensation  shall  be  granted  or  allowed 
to  any  public  officer,  servant,  agent  or  contractor,  by  the  state  or 
any  civil  division  thereof  or  by  any  board,  officer  or  other  agency 
of  the  state,  or  of  any  such  civil  division. 

Section  28.  The  legislature  shall,  by  law,  provide  for  the  occu- 
pation and  employment  of  prisoners  sentenced  to  the  several  state 
prisons,  penitentiaries,  jails  and  reformatories  in  the  state ;  and  on 
and  after  the  first  day  of  January,  in  the  year  one  thousand  eight 
hundred  and  ninety-seven,  no  person  in  any  such  prison,  peniten- 
tiary, jail  or  reformatory,  shall  be  required  or  allowed  to  work 
while  under  sentence  thereto  at  any  trade,  industry  or  occupa- 
tion wherein  or  whereby  his  work,  or  the  product  or  profit  of 
his  work,  shall  be  farmed  out,  contracted,  given  or  sold  to 
any  person,  firm,  association  or  corporation.  This  section  shall  not 
be  construed  to  prevent  the  legislature  from  providing  that  con- 
victs may  work  for,  and  that  the  products  of  their  labor  may  be 
disposed  of  to,  the  state  or  any  civil  division  thereof,  or  for  or 
to  any  public  institution  owned  or  managed  and  controlled  by 
the  state,  or  any  civil  division  thereof. 

Section  29.  The  legislature  shall  have  the  power  to  regulate 
or  prohibit  manufacturing  in  tenement  houses. 

AETICLE  IV. 

Section  1.  The  executive  power  shall  be  vested  in  a  gov- 
ernor, who  shall  hold  his  office  for  two  years.  A  lieutenant-gov- 
ernor shall  be  chosen  at  the  same  time  and  for  the  same  term. 
The  governor  shall  receive  for  his  services  an  annual  salary  of 
ten  thousand  dollars  until  the  first  day  of  January,  one  thousand 
nine  hundred  and  seventeen,  after  which  he  shall  receive  for  his 
services  an  annual  salary  of  twenty  thousand  dollars.     There  shall 


Doc.  No.  52  IS  Abticle    i  \' 

be   provided    for    his    use    a    suitable    and    furnished    executive 
residence. 

Section  2.  No  person  shall  be  eligible  to  the  office  of  governor  or 
lieutenant-governor,  except  a  citizen  of  the  United  States,  of 
the  age  of  not  less  than  thirty  years,  and  who  shall  have  been  five 
years  next  preceding  his  election  a  resident  of  this  state. 

Section  3.  The  governor  and  lieutenant-governor  shall  be 
elected  at  the  times  and  places  of  choosing  members  of  the  assem- 
bly. The  persons  respectively  having  the  highest  number  of  votes 
for  governor  and  lieutenant-governor  shall  be  elected;  but  in 
case  two  or  more  shall  have  an  equal  and  the  highest  number  of 
votes  for  governor,  or  for  lieutenant-governor,  the  two  houses 
of  the  legislature  at  its  next  annual  session  shall  forthwith,  by 
joint  ballot,  choose  one  of  such  persons  so  having  an  equal  and 
the  highest  number  of  votes  for  governor  or  lieutenant-governor. 

Section  4.  The  governor  shall  be  commander-in-chief  of  the 
military  and  naval  forces  of  the  state.  He  shall  have  power  to 
convene  the  legislature,  or  the  senate  only,  on  extraordinary 
occasions.  At  extraordinary  sessions  no  subject  shall  be  acted 
upon,  except  such  as  the  governor  may  recommend  for  consider- 
ation. He  shall  communicate  by  message  to  the  legislature  at 
every  session  the  condition  of  the  state,  and  recommend  such 
matters  to  it  as  he  shall  judge  expedient.  He  shall  transact  all 
necessary  business  with  the  officers  of  government,  civil  and  mili- 
tary. He  shall  expedite  all  such  measures  as  may  be  resolved 
upon  by  the  legislature,  and  shall  take  care  that  the  laws  are 
faithfully  executed. 

Section  5.  The  governor  shall  have  the  power  to  grant  reprieves, 
commutations  and  pardons  after  conviction,  for  all  offenses  except 
treason  and  cases  of  impeachment,  upon  such  conditions  and  with 
such  restrictions  and  limitations,  as  he  may  think  proper,  subject 
to  such  regulations  as  may  be  provided  by  law  relative  to  the 
ma  imer  of  applying  for  pardons.  Upon  conviction  for  treason, 
he  shall  have  power  to  suspend  the  execution  of  the  sentence,  until 
the  case  shall  be  reported  to  the  legislature  at  its  next  meeting, 
when  the  legislature  shall  either  pardon,  or  commute  the  sentence, 
direct  the  execution  of  the  sentence,  or  grant  a  further  reprieve. 
He  shall  annually  communicate  to  the  legislature  each  case  of 
reprieve,  commutation  or  pardon  granted,  stating  the  name  of 
the  convict,  the  crime  of  which  he  was  conviclcd,  the  sentence  and 
its  date,  and  the  date  of  the  commutation,  pardon  or  reprieve. 


Article  IV  19  Doc    No. 

Section  6.  If  the  office  of  governor  be  vacant  the  lieutenant- 
governor  shall  become  governor  for  the  remainder  of  the  term.  If 
the  governor  be  under  impeachment  or  be  unable  to  discharge  the 
powers  and  duties  of  the  office  or  be  absent  from  the  state  the 
lieutenant-governor  shall  act  as  governor  during  such  inability, 
absence  or  the  pendency  of  such  impeachment.  But  when  the 
governor  shall,  with  the  consent  of  the  legislature,  be  out  of  the 
state,  in  time  of  war,  at  the  head  of  a  military  force  thereof,  he 
shall  continue  commander-in-chief  of  all  the  military  force  of 
the  state. 

Section  7.  The  lieutenant-governor  shall  possess  the  same  quali- 
fications of  eligibility  for  office  as  the  governor.  He  shall  be 
president  of  the  senate,  but  shall  have  only  a  casting  vote  therein. 
If  the  office  of  governor  be  vacant  and  there  be  no  lieutenant- 
governor,  such  vacancy  shall  be  filled  for  the  remainder  of  the  term 
at  the  next  general  election  happening  not  less  than  three  months 
after  such  vacancy  occurs ;  and  in  any  such  case,  until  the  vacancy 
be  filled  by  election,  the  temporary  president  of  the  senate,  or  if 
there  be  none,  the  speaker  of  the  assembly  shall  become  governor 
until  the  first  day  of  the  political  year  next  succeeding  the  elec- 
tion at  which  the  office  of  governor  shall  be  filled.  If  the  office  of 
governor  be  vacant  and  the  lieutenant-governor  be  under  impeach- 
ment, or  unable  to  discharge  the  powers  and  duties  of  the  office  of 
governor  or  be  absent  from  the  state,  the  temporary  president  of 
the  senate  shall  act  as  governor  during  such  inability,  absence  or 
the  pendency  of  such  impeachment.  If  the  temporary  president 
of  the  senate  be  unable  to  discharge  the  powers  and  duties  of  the 
office  of  governor  or  be  absent  from  the  state  the  speaker  of  the 
assembly  shall  act  as  governor  during  such  inability  or  absence. 

Section  8.  The  lieutenant-governor  shall  receive  for  his  serv- 
ices an  annual  salary  of  five  thousand  dollars,  and  shall  not  re- 
ceive or  be  entitled  to  any  other  compensation,  fee  or  perquisite, 
for  any  duty  or  service  he  may  be  required  to  perform  by  the 
constitution  or  by  law. 

Section  9.  Every  bill  which  shall  have  passed  the  senate  and 
assembly  shall,  before  it  becomes  a  law,  be  presented  to  the  gov- 
ernor; if  he  approve,  he  shall  sign  it;  but  if  not,  he  shall  return 
it  with  his  objections  to  the  house  in  which  it  shall  have  originated, 
which  shall  enter  the  objections  at  large  on  the  journal,  and  pro- 
ceed to  reconsider  it.     If  after  such  reconsideration,  two-thirds 


Doc.  No.  52  20  Article  IV 

of  the  members  elected  to  that  house  shall  agree  to  pass  the  bill, 
it  shall  be  sent  together  with  the  objections  to  the  other  house  by 
which  it  shall  likewise  be  reconsidered;  and  if  approved  by  two- 
thirds  of  the  members  elected  to  that  house,  it  shall  become  a  law 
notwithstanding  the  objections  of  the  governor.  In  all  such  cases, 
the  votes  in  both  houses  shall  be  determined  by  yeas  and  nays,  and 
the  names  of  the  members  voting  shall  be  entered  on  the  journal  of 
each  house  respectively.  If  any  bill  shall  not  be  returned  by  the 
governor  within  ten  days  (Sundays  excepted)  after  it  shall  have 
been  presented  to  him,  the  same  shall  be  a  law  in  like  manner 
as  if  he  had  signed  it,  unless  the  legislature  shall,  by  its  ad- 
journment, prevent  its  return,  in  which  case  it  shall  not  become 
a  law  without  the  approval  of  the  governor.  ISTo  bill  shall  become 
a  law  after  the  final  adjournment  of  the  legislature,  unless  ap- 
proved by  the  governor  within  thirty  days  after  such  adjournment. 
If  any  bill  presented  to  the  governor  contain  several  items  of 
appropriation  of  money,  he  may  object  to  one  or  more  of  such 
items  while  approving  of  the  other  portion  of  the  bill.  In  such 
case,  he  shall  append  to  the  bill,  at  the  time  of  signing  it,  a  state- 
ment of  the  items  to  which  he  objects;  and  the  appropriation  so 
objected  to  shall  not  take  effect.  If  the  legislature  be  in  session, 
he  shall  transmit  to  the  house  in  which  the  bill  originated  a  copy 
of  such  statement,  and  the  items  objected  to  shall  be  separately 
reconsidered.  If  on  reconsideration  one  or  more  of  such  items  be 
approved  by  two-thirds  of  the  members  elected  to  each  house,  the 
same  shall  be  part  of  the  law,  notwithstanding  the  objections  of  the 
governor.  All  the  provisions  of  this  section,  in  relation  to  bills 
not  approved  by  the  governor,  shall  apply  in  cases  in  which  he 
shall  withhold  his  approval  from  any  item  or  items  contained  in 
a  bill  appropriating  money. 

AKTICLE  V. 

Section  1.  On  or  before  the  fifteenth  day  of  November  in  the 
year  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  sixteen  and  in  each  year 
thereafter  the  head  of  each  department  of  the  state  government 
except  the  legislature  and  judiciary,  shall  submit  to  the  governor 
itemized  estimates  of  appropriations  to  meet  the  financial  needs  of 
such  department,  including  a  statement  in  detail  of  all  moneys  for 
which  any  general  or  special  appropriation  is  desired  at  the  ensuing 
session  of  the  legislature,  classified  according  to  relative  im- 
portance and  in  such  form  and  with  such  explanation  as  the  gov- 
ernor may  require. 


Article  V  21  Dor.    No.  52 

The  governor,  after  public  hearing  thereon,  at  which  lie  may 
require  the  attendance  of  heads  of  departments  and  their  sub- 
ordinates, shall  revise  such  estimates  according  to  his  judgment. 

Itemized  estimates  of  the  financial  needs  of  the  legislature  cer- 
tified by  the  presiding  officer  of  each  house  and  of  the  judiciary 
certified  by  the  comptroller  shall  be  transmitted  to  the  governor 
before  the  fifteenth  day  of  January  next  succeeding  for  inclusion 
in  the  budget  without  revision  but  with  such  recommendation  as 
he  may  think  proper. 

On  or  before  the  first  day  of  February  next  succeeding  he  shall 
submit  to  the  legislature  a  budget  containing  a  complete  plan  of 
proposed  expenditures  and  estimated  revenues.  It  shall  contain 
all  the  estimates  so  revised  or  certified  and  shall  be  accompanied 
by  a  bill  or  bills  for  all  proposed  appropriations  and  reappropria- 
tions,  clearly  itemized;  it  shall  show  the  estimated  revenues  for 
the  ensuing  fiscal  year  and  the  estimated  surplus  or  deficit  of 
revenues  at  the  end  of  the  current  fiscal  year  together  with  the 
measures  of  taxation,  if  any,  which  the  governor  may  propose  for 
the  increase  of  the  revenues.  It  shall  be  accompanied  by  a  state- 
ment of  the  current  assets,  liabilities,  reserves  and  surplus  or  de- 
ficit of  the  state;  statements  of  the  debts  and  funds  of  the  state; 
an  estimate  of  its  financial  condition  as  of  the  beginning  and  end 
of  the  ensuing  fiscal  year ;  and  a  statement  of  revenues  and 
expenditures  for  the  two  fiscal  years  next  preceding  said  year,  in 
form  suitable  for  comparison.  The  governor  may,  before  final 
action  by  the  legislature  thereon,  amend  or  supplement  the  budget. 

A  copy  of  the  budget  and  of  any  amendments  or  additions 
thereto  shall  be  forthwith  transmitted  by  the  governor  to  the 
comptroller. 

The  governor  and  the  heads  of  such  departments  shall  have  the 
right,  and  it  shall  be  their  duty  when  requested  by  either  house 
of  the  legislature,  to  appear  and  be  heard  in  respect  to  the 
budget  during  the  consideration  thereof,  and  to  answer  in- 
quiries relevant  thereto.  The  procedure  for  such  appearance  and 
inquiries  shall  be  provided  by  law.  The  legislature  may  not  alter 
an  appropriation  bill  submitted  by  the  governor  except  to  strike 
out  or  reduce  items  therein ;  but  this  provision  shall  not  apply  to 
items  for  the  legislature  or  judiciary.  Such  a  bill  when  passed 
by  both  houses  shall  be  a  law  immediately  without  further  action 
by  the  governor,  except  that  appropriations  for  the  legislature  and 
judiciary  shall  be  subject  to  his  approval  as  provided  in  section 
nine  of  article  four. 


Doc.  No.   52  22  Article  V 

Neither  house  shall  consider  further  appropriations  until  the 
appropriation  bills  proposed  by  the  governor  shall  have  been 
finally  acted  on  by  both  houses;  nor  shall  such  further  appro- 
priations be  then  made  except  by  separate  bills  each  for  a  single 
work  or  object,  which  bills  shall  be  subject  to  the  governor's  ap- 
proval as  provided  in  section  nine  of  article  four.  Nothing  herein 
contained  shall  be  construed  to  prevent  the  governor  from  recom- 
mending that  one  or  more  of  his  proposed  bills  be  passed  in  ad- 
vance of  the  others  to  supply  the  immediate  needs  of  government. 

ARTICLE  VI. 

Section  1.  There  shall  be  the  following  civil  departments  in 
the  state  government:  (1)  law,  (2)  finance,  (3)  accounts,  (4) 
treasury,  (5)  taxation,  (6)  state,  (7)  public  works,  (8)  health, 
(9)  agriculture,  (10)  charities  and  corrections,  (11)  banking, 
(12)  insurance,  (13)  labor  and  industry,  (14)  education,  (15) 
public  utilities,  (10)  conservation  and  (17)  civil  service. 

Section  2.  (1)  The  head  of  the  department  of  law  shall  be  the 
attorney-general.  He  shall  be  elected  at  the  same  time  and  for 
the  same  term  as  the  governor. 

(2)  The  head  of  the  department  of  finance  shall  be  the  comp- 
troller. He  shall  be  elected  at  the  same  time  and  for  the  same  term 
as  the  governor.  Excepting  the  powers  of  examination  and  verifi- 
cation of  accounts  vested  in  the  department  of  accounts,  he  shall 
have  the  present  powers  and  duties  of  the  comptroller,  subject  to 
the  authority  of  the  legislature  to  increase,  modify  or  diminish 
the  same. 

(3)  The  head  of  the  department  of  accounts  shall  be  the  commis- 
sioner of  accounts.  He  shall  have  power  to  examine  and  verify 
all  accounts  showing  the  financial  transactions  of  the  state  and  its 
several  departments  and  officers.  He  shall  also  make  such  special 
examinations  and  reports  as  from  time  to  time  may  be  required 
by  resolution  of  either  house  of  the  legislature. 

(4)  The  head  of  the  department  of  the  treasury  shall  be  the 
treasurer. 

(5)  The  head  of  the  department  of  taxation  shall  be  a  state  tax 
commission. 

(0)  The  head  of  the  department  of  state  shall  be  the  secretary 
of  state.  He  shall  be  the  keeper  of  the  great  seal  and  of  the 
records  and  archives  of  tin-  state,  shall  issue  writs  of  election  and 
certify  the  results. 


Article  VI  2:3  Doc.   No.  52 

(7)  The  head  of  the  department  of  public  works  shall  be  the  su- 
perintendent of  public  works.  He  shall  have  the  construction, 
care,  maintenance  and  operation  of  the  state's  public  works, 
including  canals,  highways,  and  all  public  buildings  not  from 
time  to  time  assigned  by  law  to  any  other  department,  and  shall 
provide  for  the  needs  of  the  several  state  departments  in  engineer- 
ing and  architecture. 

(8)  The  head  of  the  department  of  health  shall  be  the  com- 
missioner of  health. 

(9)  The  head  of  the  department  of  agriculture  shall  be  the 
commissioner  of  agriculture. 

(10)  The  head  of  the  department  of  charities  and  corrections 
shall  be  the  secretary  of  charities  and  corrections.  He  shall  have 
power  of  inspection  and  supervision  of  all  state  charitable  insti- 
tutions, state  hospitals  for  the  insane,  state  prisons  and  other  state 
correctional  institutions. 

(11)  The  head  of  the  department  of  banking  shall  be  the  su- 
perintendent of  banks. 

(12)  The  head  of  the  department  of  insurance  shall  be  the  su- 
perintendent of  insurance. 

(13)  The  head  of  the  department  of  labor  and  industry  shall  be 
an  industrial  commission  or  commissioner  as  may  be  provided  by 
law.  Commissioners  shall  be  appointed  by  the  governor  by  and 
with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  senate. 

(14)  The  department  of  education  shall  be  administered  by  the 
university  of  the  state  of  New  York.  The  chief  administrative 
officer  of  the  department  shall  be  appointed  by  the  regents  of  the 
university. 

(15)  The  department  of  public  utilities  shall  consist  of  two  pub- 
lic service  commissions.  Commissioners  shall  be  appointed  by  the 
governor  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  senate.  The 
governor  may  remove  any  commissioner  for  cause  after  service 
upon  him  of  a  written  statement  of  the  alleged  cause  and  an  op- 
portunity to  be  heard  thereon.  Until  the  legislature  shall  other- 
wise provide,  the  existing  commissions  are  continued  with  the 
jurisdiction  and  powers  at  present  vested  in  them. 

(16)  The  department  of  conservation  shall  be  under  the  direc- 
tion of  the  conservation  commission. 

(17)  The  department  of  civil  service  shall  be  under  the  direction 
of  a  civil  service  commission  consisting  of  three  commissioners. 
They  shall  be  appointed  by  the  governor  by  and  with  the  advice 


Doc.    No.    :>:>  24  Article  VI 

and  consent  of  the  senate,  for  terms  of  six  years,  and  shall  be  so 
classified  that  one  shall  go  out  of  office  at  the  end  of  every  two 
years.  The  governor  may  remove  any  commissioner  for  cause 
after  service  upon  him  of  a  written  statement  of  the  alleged  cause 
and  an  opportunity  to  be  heard  thereon.  The  commission  shall 
take  care  that  the  provisions  of  this  constitution  relating  to  civil 
service  and  of  laws  enacted  thereunder  are  faithfully  observed 
and  enforced. 

Section  3.  At  the  session  immediately  following  the  adoption 
of  this  constitution,  the  legislature  shall  provide  by  law  for  the 
appropriate  assignment,  to  take  effect  not  earlier  than  the  first 
day  of  January,  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  seventeen,  of 
all  the  civil  administrative  and  executive  functions  of  the  state 
government,  except  those  of  assistants  in  the  office  of  the  gov- 
ernor, to  the  several  departments  in  this  article  provided.  Sub- 
ject to  the  limitations  contained  in  this  constitution  the  legisla- 
ture may  from  time  to  time  assign  by  law  new  powers  and  func- 
tions to  departments,  officers,  boards  or  commissions  continued 
or  created  under  this  constitution,  and  increase,  modify  or  dimin- 
ish their  powers  and  functions.  No  specific  grant  of  power  herein 
to  a  department  shall  prevent  the  legislature  from  conferring  addi- 
tional powers  upon  such  department.  No  new  departments  shall 
be  created  hereafter.  Any  bureau,  board,  commission  or  office 
hereafter  created  except  assistants  in  the  office  of  the  governor 
shall  be  placed  in  one  of  the  departments  enumerated  in  this 
article.  The  elective  state  officers  in  office  at  the  time  this  con- 
stitution takes  effect  shall  continue  in  office  until  the  end  of  the 
terms  for  which  they  were  elected.  Pending  the  assignment  of 
the  civil  administrative  and  executive  functions  by  the  legislature 
pursuant  to  the  direction  of  this  section,  the  powers  and  duties  of 
the  several  departments,  boards,  commissions  and  offices  now  exist- 
ing are  continued.  Subject  to  the  power  of  the  legislature  to  reduce 
the  number  of  officers,  when  the  powers  and  duties  of  any  existing 
office  are  assigned  to  any  department,  the  officers  exercising  such 
powers  shall  continue  in  office  in  such  department,  and  their  term 
of  office  shall  not  be  shortened  by  such  assignment. 

Section  4.  The  heads  of  all  the  departments  and  the  members 
of  all  commissions  unless  otherwise  provided  in  this  constitution 
shall  be  appointed  by  (lie  governor  and  may  lie  removed  by  him  in 
his   discretion. 


Article  VI  25  Doc.    No.   52 

Section  5.  The  attorney-general  and  comptroller  may  lie  re- 
moved from  office  by  impeachment  in  the  same  manner  as  the 
governor.  A  vacancy  in  the  office  of  attorney-general  or  of  comp- 
troller shall  be  filled  for  the  remainder  of  the  term  at  the  next  gen- 
eral election  happening  not  less  than  three  months  after  such 
vacancy  occurs.  Until  the  vacancy  be  so  filled  by  election,  the 
governor,  or  if  the  senate  be  in  session,  the  governor  by  and  with 
the  advice  and  consent  of  the  senate,  may  fill  such  vacancy  by  ap- 
pointment which  shall  continue  until  the  first  day  of  the  political 
year  next  succeeding  the  election  at  which  such  office  may  be  filled. 
The  compensation  provided  by  law  for  each  of  such  officers  shall 
not  be  increased  or  diminished  during  the  term  for  which  he  shall 
have  been  elected  and  he  shall  not  receive  to  his  use  any  fees  or 
perquisites  of  office  or  other  compensation. 

Section  C.  All  appointed  heads  of  departments  shall  be  subject 
to  impeachment  in  the  same  manner  as  the  governor  or  they  may 
be  removed  by  the  senate  by  vote  of  two-thirds  of  all  the  members 
elected  thereto.  A  vacancy  occurring  in  a  board  or  commission 
appointed  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  senate  for  a 
fixed  term  shall  be  filled  for  the  unexpired  term  in  the  same 
manner  as  an  original  appointment,  except  that  a  vacancy  occur- 
ring or  existing  while  the  senate  is  not  in  session  shall  be  filled  by 
the  governor  by  appointment  for  a  term  expiring  at  the  end  of 
twenty  days  from  the  commencement  of  the  next  meeting  of  the 
senate. 

Section  7.  The  lieutenant-governor,  speaker  of  the  assembly, 
secretary  of  state,  attorney-general,  comptroller,  treasurer  and 
superintendent  of  public  works  shall  constitute  the  canal  board 
and  be  the  commissioners  of  the  land  office  and  the  commissioners 
of  the  canal  fund. 

Section  8.  This  article  shall  not  apply  to  the  military  or  naval 
affairs  or  forces  nor  to  property  from  time  to  time  devoted  to 
military  or  naval  purposes. 

AETICLE  VII. 

Section  1.  The  department  of  conservation  shall  consist  of  nine 
commissioners  to  serve  without  compensation  and  to  be  appointed 
by  the  governor  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  senate 
for  terms  which  shall  expire  in  nine  successive  years,  the  first  end- 
ing on  the  first  day  of  January,  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and 


Doc.   No.  52  26  Article  VI I 

seventeen,  and  their  successors  shall  be  appointed  for  terms  of  nine 
years.  Vacancies  shall  be  filled  for  the  unexpired  term.  One 
commissioner  shall  reside  in  each  judicial  district.  No  person 
shall  be  eligible  to  or  shall  continue  to  hold  the  office  of  commis- 
sioner, who  is  engaged  in  the  business  of  lumbering  in  any  forest 
preserve  comity  or  who  is  engaged  in  any  business  in  the  prosecu- 
tion of  which  hydraulic  power  is  used  or  in  which  water  is  dis- 
tributed or  sold  under  any  public  franchise  or  who  is  an  officer  or 
holder  of  the  stock  or  bonds  of  any  corporation  engaged  in  such 
business  within  the  state.  They  shall  be  subject  to  removal  by  the 
governor  on  charges,  after  an  opportunity  to  be  heard.  Subject  to 
the  limitations  in  this  constitution  contained,  the  department 
shall  be  charged  with  the  development  and  protection  of  the 
natural  resources  of  the  state ;  the  encouragement  of  forestry  and 
the  suppression  of  forest  fires  throughout  the  state;  the  exclusive 
care,  maintenance  and  administration  of  the  forest  preserve ;  the 
conservation,  prevention  of  pollution,  and  regulation  of  the 
waters  of  the  state ;  the  protection  and  propagation  of  its 
fish,  birds,  game,  shellfish  and  Crustacea,  except  migratory 
fish  of  the  sea  within  the  limits  of  the  marine  district,  with 
the  power,  subject  to  the  veto  within  thirty  days  of  the  governor, 
to  enact  regulations  with  respect  to  the  taking,  possession,  sale 
and  transportation  thereof,  which  shall  have  the  force  of  law, 
when  filed  in  the  office  of  the  department  of  state  and  published 
as  the  legislature  may  provide,  until  and  unless  the  legislature 
shall  thereafter  modify  such  regulations.  The  department  shall 
also  be  entrusted  with  the  enforcement  of  the  general  laws  of 
the  state  respecting  the  subjects  hereinbefore  enumerated  and 
exercise  such  additional  powers  as  from  time  to  time  may  be 
conferred  by  law.  The  department  shall  appoint  and  may  at 
pleasure  remove  a  superintendent.  It  may  also  appoint  all  other 
necessary  subordinates. 

Section  2.  The  lands  of  the  state,  now  owned  or  hereafter  ac- 
quired, constituting  the  forest  preserve  as  now  fixed  by  law,  shall 
be  forever  kept  as  wild  forest  lands.  They  shall  not  be  leased, 
sold  or  exchanged,  or  be  taken  by  any  corporation,  public  or 
private,  nor  shall  the  trees  and  timber  thereon  be  sold,  removed 
or  destroyed.  The  department  is,  however,  empowered  to  re- 
forest lands  in  the  forest  preserve,  to  construct  fire  trails  thereon, 
and  to  remove  dead  trees  and  dead  timber  therefrom  for  purposes 


Article  VII  27  Doc.  No.   52 

of  reforestation  and  fire  protection  solely,  but  shall  not  sell  the 
same.  Nothing  herein  contained  shall  prevent  the  state  from 
constructing  a  state  highway  from  Saranac  Lake  in  Franklin 
county  to  Long  Lake  in  Hamilton  county  and  thence  to  Old  Forge 
in  Herkimer  county  by  way  of  Blue  Mountain  lake  and  Raquette 
lake. 

Section  3.  The  legislature  may  by  general  laws  provide  for 
the  use  of  not  exceeding  three  per  centum  of  such  lands  for  the 
construction  and  maintenance  of  reservoirs  for  municipal  water 
supply,  for  the  canals  of  the  state  and  to  regulate  the  flow  of 
streams.  Such  reservoirs  shall  be  constructed,  owned  and  con- 
trolled by  the  state,  but  such  work  shall  not  be  undertaken  until 
after  the  boundaries  and  high  flow  lines  thereof  shall  have  been 
accurately  surveyed  and  fixed,  and  after  public  notice,  hearing 
and  determination  that  such  lands  are  required  for  such  public 
use.  The  expense  of  any  such  improvements  shall  be  apportioned 
on  the  public  and  private  property  and  municipalities  benefited 
to  the  extent  of  the  benefits  received.  Any  such  reservoir  shall 
always  be  operated  by  the  state  and  the  legislature  shall  provide 
for  a  charge  upon  the  property  and  municipalities  benefited  for 
a  reasonable  return  to  the  state  upon  the  value  of  the  rights  and 
property  of  the  state  used  and  the  services  of  the  state  rendered, 
which  shall  be  fixed  for  terms  of  not  exceeding  ten  years,  and 
be  readjustable  at  the  end  of  any  term.  Unsanitary  conditions 
shall  not  be  created  or  continued  by  any  such  public  works. 

Section  4.  The  legislature  may  authorize  the  use  by  the  city  of 
New  York  for  its  municipal  water  supply  of  lands  now  belonging 
to  the  state  located  in  the  towns  of  Hurley  and  Shandaken  in  the 
county  of  Ulster  and  in  the  town  of  Lexington  in  the  county  of 
Greene,  for  just  compensation. 

Section  5.  The  legislature  shall  annually  make  provision  for 
the  purchase  of  real  property  within  the  Adirondack  and  Catskill 
parks  as  defined  by  law,  the  reforestation  of  lands  and  the  mak- 
ing of  boundary  and  valuation  surveys. 

Section  6.  A  violation  of  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  article 
may  be  restrained  at  the  suit  of  the  people  or,  with  the  consent 
of  the  supreme  court  in  appellate  division,  on  notice  to  the  at- 
torney-general at  the  suit  of  any  citizen. 


Doc.  No.  52  28  Article  VIII 


ARTICLE  VIII. 

Section  1.  Tlie  supreme  court  is  continued  with  general  juris- 
diction in  law  and  equity,  subject  to  such  appellate  jurisdiction 
of  the  court  of  appeals  as  now  is  or  may  be  prescribed  by  law 
not  inconsistent  with  this  article.  The  existing  judicial  districts 
of  the  state  are  continued  until  changed  as  hereinafter  provided. 
The  supreme  court  shall  consist  of  the  justices  in  office  on  the 
first  day  of  January,  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  sixteen, 
and  successors  of  the  three  justices  transferred  to  the  court  of 
appeals  as  in  this  article  provided,  and  of  two  additional  justices 
who  shall  reside  in  and  be  chosen  by  the  electors  of  the  first 
judicial  district,  and  their  successors,  together  with  such  additional 
justices  as  may  be  authorized  by  the  legislature  pursuant  to  the 
provisions  of  this  article.  The  successors  of  said  justices  shall  be 
chosen  by  the  electors  of  their  respective  judicial  districts.  The 
legislature  may  alter  the  judicial  districts  once  after  every  federal 
census  or  state  enumeration  and  thereupon  reapportion  the  justices 
to  be  thereafter  elected  in  the  districts  so  altered.  The  legislature 
may  from  time  to  time  further  increase  the  number  of  justices  in 
any  judicial  district  except  that  the  number  of  justices  in  the  first, 
second  and  ninth  districts  shall  not  be  thereby  increased  to  exceed 
one  justice  for  each  eighty  thousand,  or  fraction  over  forty 
thousand  of  the  population  thereof,  as  shown  by  the  last  federal 
or  state  census  or  enumeration,  and  except  that  the  number  of  jus- 
tices in  any  other  district  shall  not  be  increased  to  exceed  one  jus- 
tice for  each  sixty  thousand  or  fraction  over  thirty-five  thousand 
of  the  population  thereof  as  shown  by  the  last  federal  or  state 
census  or  enumeration. 

Section  2.  The  present  division  of  the  state  into  four  judicial 
departments  is  continued.  Once  every  ten  years  the  legislature 
may  alter  the  judicial  departments,  but  without  increasing  the 
number  thereof.  They  shall  be  bounded  by  county  lines,  and  be 
compact  and  equal  in  population  as  nearly  as  may  be.  The  appel- 
late  divisions  of  the  supreme  court  are  continued  and  shall  consist 
of  not  less  than  ten  nor  more  than  twelve  justices  in  the  first  de- 
partment, seven  justices  in  the  second  department  and  five  justices 
in  each  of  the  other  departments.  The  justices  heretofore  desig- 
nated shall  continue  to  sit,  in  the  appellate  divisions  until  the  terms 
of  their  designations  respectively  expire.  The  appellate  division 
in  the  first  department  may  sit  in  two  parts,  in  which  case  the 


Article   Vlil  29  Doc.    No.   52 

presiding  justice  shall  assign  the  justices  who  from  time  to  time 
shall  sit  in  each  part.  The  presiding  justice  may  preside  in  either 
part  and  he  shall  designate  the  justice  to  preside  in  either  part 
when  he  is  not  present.  In  each  appellate  division  or  part  thereof 
four  shall  constitute  a  quorum,  and  the  concurrence  of  three  shall 
be  necessary  to  a  decision.  No  more  than  five  justices  shall  sit  in 
any  case. 

The  governor  shall  designate  the  presiding  justice  of  each  de- 
partment, who  shall  act  as  such  during  his  term  of  office  and  shall 
be  a  resident  of  the  department.  The  other  justices  shall  be  desig- 
nated by  the  governor  from  all  the  justices  elected  to  the  supreme 
court  for  terms  of  five  years  or  the  unexpired  portions  of  their 
respective  terms  of  office,  if  less  than  five  years.  From  time  to 
time  as  the  terms  of  the  designations  expire,  or  vacancies  occur, 
the  governor  shall  make  new  designations.  A  majority  of  the 
justices  so  designated  to  sit  in  the  appellate  division,  in  each  de- 
partment shall  be  residents  of  the  department.  Ten  justices  shall 
be  designated  to  sit  in  the  appellate  division  in  the  first  depart- 
ment, but  in  case  the  presiding  justice  thereof  at  any  time  shall 
certify  to  the  governor  that  the  interests  of  justice  so  require  the 
governor  shall  designate  two  additional  justices  to  sit  therein.  In 
case  of  the  absence  or  inability  to  act  of  a  justice  of  any  appellate 
division,  the  presiding  justice  thereof  may  assign  any  of  the  jus- 
tices of  the  supreme  court  to  sit  in  the  appellate  division  during 
such  absence  or  inability,  but  no  justice  shall  be  so  designated  to 
sit  longer  than  four  months  in  any  year.  In  case  the  presiding 
justice  of  any  appellate  division  shall  certify  to  the  governor  that 
one  or  more  additional  justices  are  needed  for  the  speedy  disposi- 
tion of  the  business  before  it  the  governor  shall  designate  such  addi- 
tional justice  or  justices.  Whenever  the  appellate  division  in  any 
department  shall  be  unable  to  dispose  of  its  business  within  a 
reasonable  time,  a  majority  of  the  presiding  justices  of  the  several 
departments  at  a  meeting  called  by  the  presiding  justice  of  the 
department  in  arrears  shall  transfer  such  number  of  the  pending- 
appeals  as  the  presiding  justices  may  determine  to  be  necessary 
from  such  department  to  any  other  department  for  hearing  and 
determination.  No  justice  of  the  appellate  division  shall,  within 
the  department  to  which  he  may  be  designated  to  perform  the 
duties  of  an  appellate  justice,  exercise  any  of  the  powers  of  a 
justice  of  the  supreme  court,  other  than  those  of  a  justice  out  of 
court,  and  those  pertaining  to  the  appellate  division,  or  to  the 


Doc.  No.   52  30  Article  VIII 

hearing  and  decision  of  motions  submitted  by  consent  of  counsel, 
but  any  such  justice,  when  not  actually  engaged  in  performing  the 
duties  of  such  appellate  justice  in  the  department  to  which  he  is 
designated,  may  hold  any  term  of  the  supreme  court  and  exercise 
any  of  the  powers  of  a  justice  of  the  supreme  court  in  any  county 
or  judicial  district  in  any  other  department  of  the  state.  The  ap- 
pellate division,  except  as  herein  provided,  shall  have  the  jurisdic- 
tion now  exercised  by  it  and  such  additional  jurisdiction  as  may 
be  conferred  by  the  legislature.  On  appeals  from  judgments  of 
conviction  in  criminal  cases,  the  appellate  division  or  the  appellate 
term  as  the  case  may  be  may  reduce  the  sentence  imposed  by  the 
trial  court  or  judge.  It  shall  have  power  to  appoint  and  remove  a 
reporter.  The  justices  of  the  appellate  division  in  each  department 
shall  have  power  to  fix  the  times  and  places  for  holding  the  terms 
of  the  supreme  court  therein,  and  to  assign  the  justices  in  the  de- 
partments to  hold  such  terms. 

Section  3.  There  shall  be  an  appellate  term  of  the  supreme 
court  in  the  first  and  in  the  second  department  consisting  of  not 
less  than  three  nor  more  than  five  justices  of  the  supreme  court 
to  be  designated  annually  by  the  appellate  division  of  the  supreme 
court  in  such  departments  respectively.  Such  appellate  divisions 
respectively  may  designate  justices  to  sit  in  the  appellate  term 
during  the  temporary  disability  of  any  of  the  justices  previously 
designated.  Three  shall  constitute  a  quorum,  and  the  concurrence 
of  a  majority  of  the  justices  sitting  shall  be  necessary  to  a 
decision.  All  appeals  from  judgments  and  orders  in  civil  cases 
made  by  county  courts  within  such  departments,  and  all  appeals 
from  judgments  and  orders  made  by  the  city  court  of  the  city  of 
New  York,  the  municipal  court  of  the  city  of  New  York,  the 
court  of  special  sessions  of  the  city  of  New  York,  as  such  courts 
now  exist,  or  as  hereafter  consolidated  or  reorganized  pursuant 
to  this  article,  and  by  all  other  inferior  local  courts,  except  courts 
held  by  justices  of  the  peace,  city  magistrates'  courts,  and  courts 
of  special  sessions  held  by  one  city  magistrate  only,  within  such 
departments,  shall  be  heard  at  the  appellate  term.  The  legislature 
may  enlarge  or  restrict  the  jurisdiction  of  the  appellate  term. 
Appeals  to  the  appellate  division  from  judgments  or  orders  of  the 
appellate  term  may  be  taken  as  of  right  only  when  the  appellate 
term  on  reversing  or  modifying  a  judgment  makes  new  findings 
of  fact  and  renders  judgment  thereon.  Appeals  to.  the  appellate 
division   also   may    be   allowed    by    the   proper   appellate  division. 


Article  VII]  31  Doc.  No.  52 

Section  4.  No  judge  or  justice  shall  sit  in  the  appellate  term, 
appellate  division  or  in  the  court  of  appeals  in  review  of  a  decision 
made  by  him  or  by  any  court  of  which  he  was  at  the  time  a  sit- 
ting member.  The  testimony  in  equity  cases  shall  be  taken  in  like 
manner  as  in  cases  at  law;  and,  except  as  herein  otherwise  pro- 
vided, the  legislature  shall  have  the  same  power  to  alter  and 
regulate  the  jurisdiction  and  proceedings  in  law  and  in  equity 
that  it  has  heretofore  exercised. 

Section  5.  The  official  terms  of  the  justices  of  the  supreme 
court  shall  be  fourteen  years  from  and  including  the  first  day  of 
January  next  after  their  election.  When  a  vacancy  shall  occur 
otherwise  than  by  expiration  of  term  in  the  office  of  justice  of  the 
supreme  court  the  same  shall  be  filled  for  a  full  term,  at  the  next 
general  election,  happening  not  less  than  three  months  after  such 
vacancy  occurs ;  and,  until  the  vacancy  shall  be  so  filled,  the  gov- 
ernor by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  senate,  if  the 
senate  shall  be  in  session,  or  if  not  in  session  the  governor,  may  fill 
such  vacancy  by  appointment,  which  shall  continue  until  and  in- 
cluding the  last  day  of  December  next  after  the  election  at  which 
the  vacancy  shall  be  filled. 

Section  G.  To  secure  a  more  simple,  speedy  and  effective 
administration  of  justice,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  legislature  to 
act  with  all  convenient  speed  upon  the  report  of  the  board  of  statu- 
tory consolidation  transmitted  to  the  legislature  by  the  governor  on 
the  twenty-first  day  of  April,  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  fif- 
teen, and  to  enact  a  brief  and  simple  civil  practice  act  and  to  adopt 
a  separate  body  of  civil  practice  rules  for  the  regulation  of  pro- 
cedure in  the  court  of  appeals,  supreme  court  and  county  courts. 
The  legislature  may  make  the  civil  practice  rules  or  any  part 
thereof  applicable  to  such  other  courts  as  it  may  provide.  There- 
after, from  time  to  time,  at  intervals  of  not  less  than  five  years, 
the  legislature  may  appoint  a  commission  to  consider  and  report 
what  changes,  if  any,  there  should  be  in  the  law  and  rules 
governing  civil  procedure.  The  legislature  shall  act  on  the  report 
of  each  such  commission  by  a  single  bill,  and  the  legislature  shall 
not  otherwise,  or  at  any  other  time,  enact  any  law  prescribing, 
regulating  or  changing  the  civil  procedure  in  the  court  of  appeals, 
supreme  court  or  county  courts,  unless  the  judges  or  justices 
empowered  to  make  and  amend  civil  practice  rules  shall  certify 
that  legislation  is  necessary. 


Doc.  No.   52  ?>2  Article  VIII 

After  the  adoption  of  the  civil  practice  rules  by  the  legislature 
under  the  requirements  of  the  first  paragraph  of  this  section,  the 
power  to  alter  and  amend  such  rules  and  to  make,  alter  and  amend 
civil  practice  rules  shall  vest  and  remain  in  the  courts  of  the 
state  to  be  exercised  by  the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals  and 
the  justices  of  the  appellate  divisions  of  the  supreme  court,  or 
by  such  judges  or  justices  of  the  court  of  appeals,  the  supreme 
court  and  the  county  courts  as  the  legislature  shall  provide. 

Section  7.  The  court  of  claims  is  continued  and  shall  be  a  court 
of  record.  It  shall  consist  of  the  three  judges  now  in  office,  who 
shall  hold  their  offices  until  the  expiration  of  their  respective 
terms,  and  their  successors  who  shall  be  appointed  by  the  governor 
by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  senate  and  who  shall 
hold  office  for  nine  years.  The  legislature  may  further  increase 
the  number  of  judges  of  the  court  of  claims  by  permanent  or 
temporary  appointment  but  not  to  exceed  five  in  all.  The  addi- 
tional judges  heretofore  appointed  shall  continue  to  serve  until  the 
first  day  of  January,  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  eighteen,  or 
such  earlier  date  as  shall  be  determined  pursuant  to  law.  The 
court  shall  have  power  to  appoint  and  remove  a  clerk  and  such 
court  stenographers  and  attendants  as  the  legislature  may  provide. 
The  judges  shall  continue  to  receive  from  the  state  their  present 
compensation  and  allowances  until  the  legislature  shall  otherwise 
provide.  The  court  shall  have  the  jurisdiction  now  exercised  by 
it  and  such  additional  jurisdiction  to  hear  and  determine  claims 
against  the  state  or  between  conflicting  claimants  as  the  legis- 
lature may  provide.  The  judges  of  the  court  may  separately  take 
testimony  in  relation  to  any  claim,  but  no  award  shall  be  made 
except  by  a  majority  of  the  whole  court.  The  court  may  establish 
rules  to  govern  its  own  procedure. 

Section  8.  Supreme  court  commissioners  may  be  appointed  as 
hereinafter  provided,  one  or  more  of  whom  may  be  designated  by 
the  court  to  determine  the  compensation  to  be  paid  whenever  pri- 
vate property  is  taken  for  a  public  use  in  the  judicial  department 
or  districl  for  which  they  shall  have  been  appointed,  when  such 
compensation  is  not  made  by  the  stale,  and  who  also  may  respec- 
tively be  designated  as  referee  whenever  issues  are  properly  re- 
ferred for  determination  or  report,  and  who  shall  perform  such 
other  or  further  duties  as  may  be  devolved  upon  them  by 
special   order  or  rule  of  court  by  the  appellate  division  or  by 


Aeticle  VIII  33  Doc.  No.  52 

the  civil  practice  rules.  The  respective  appellate  divisions  in  the 
first  and  second  judicial  departments  from  time  to  time  may  ap- 
point for  each  of  the  counties  therein  within  the  city  of  New 
York  such  commissioners  as  they  deem  necessary  and,  with  the  ap- 
proval of  the  board  of  estimate  and  apportionment  or  its  succes- 
sors, fix  their  compensation  which  shall  be  uniform  in  each  county 
and  a  charge  against  the  city  of  New  York.  The  legislature 
may  at  any  time  authorize  the  appointment  of  supreme  court 
commissioners  in  the  third  and  fourth  judicial  departments 
and  in  the  counties  in  the  second  department  not  within  the 
city  of  New  York.  Such  commissioners  shall  be  members  of 
the  bar  of  not  less  than  ten  years  standing.  They  shall  not  prac- 
tice as  attorneys  or  counselors  in  any  court  of  this  state  or  of  the 
United  States.  They  shall  hold  office  during  the  pleasure  of  the 
respective  appellate  divisions  by  which  they  shall  have  been  ap- 
pointed. Supreme  court  commissioners  during  their  continuance 
in  office  shall  not  hold  any  other  office  or  public  trust. 

Section  9.  The  court  of  appeals  is  continued.  It  shall  consist 
of  the  chief  judge  and  associate  judges  now  in  office,  who  shall 
hold  their  offices  until  the  expiration  of  their  respective  terms, 
and  their  successors,  who  shall  be  chosen  by  the  electors  of  the 
state,  and  of  the  three  justices  of  the  supreme  court  now  serv- 
ing as  associate  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals  by  designation  by 
the  governor,  who  shall  be  associate  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals 
until  the  expiration  of  the  terms  for  which  they  respectively  were 
elected  justices  of  the  supreme  court,  and  their  successors  who 
shall  be  chosen  by  the  electors  of  the  state.  The  official  terms  of 
the  chief  judge  and  associate  judges  shall  be  fourteen  years  from 
and  including  the  first  day  of  January  next  after  their  election. 
No  more  than  seven  judges  shall  sit  in  any  case.  Five  members 
of  the  court  shall  constitute  a  quorum,  and  the  concurrence  of  four 
shall  be  necessary  to  a  decision.  The  court  shall  have  power  to 
appoint  and  to  remove  its  reporter,  clerk  and  attendants.  In  case 
of  the  temporary  absence  or  inability  to  act  of  any  judge  of  the 
court  of  appeals,  the  court  may  designate  any  justice  of  the 
supreme  court  to  serve  as  associate  judge  of  the  court  of  appeals, 
during  such  absence  or  inability  to  act,  but  for  a  period  not  ex- 
ceeding four  months  in  any  year.  For  the  purpose  of  disposing 
with  reasonable  speed  of  the  accumulation  of  causes  now  pending 
in  the  court  of  appeals,  the  court  on  or  before  the  first  day  of 
March,  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  sixteen,  shall  designate 


Doc.   No.   52  34  Article  VIII 

not  less  than  four  nor  more  than  six  justices  of  the  supreme  court 
to  serve  as  associate  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals  until  the  causes 
pending  on  the  calendar  shall  he  reduced  to  one  hundred  but 
not  later  than  the  thirty-first  day  of  December,  one  thousand  nine 
hundred  and  seventeen,  when  they  shall  return  to  the  supreme 
court.  While  serving  in  the  court  of  appeals,  the  justices  so 
designated  shall  be  relieved  of  their  duties  as  justices  of  the 
supreme  court.  During  such  period  the  court  of  appeals  shall  sit 
in  two  parts,  each  of  which  shall  consist  of  not  more  than  seven 
judges,  five  of  whom  shall  constitute  a  quorum,  the  concurrence  of 
four  being  necessary  to  a  decision.  The  chief  judge  shall  from 
time  to  time  designate  the  associate  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals 
and  the  justices  of  the  supreme  court  serving  as  associate  judges 
of  the  court  of  appeals  to  sit  in  the  respective  parts  of  the  court,  in 
such  manner  that  the  justices  of  the  supreme  court  so  designated 
shall  be  distributed  as  equally  as  may  be  between  the  two  parts. 
The  chief  judge  may  preside  in  either  part,  and  he  shall  desig- 
nate the  judge  who  shall  preside  in  cither  part  when  he  is  not 
present.  The  causes  pending  in  the  court  of  appeals  shall  be  dis- 
tributed by  the  chief  judge  as  nearly  equally  as  may  be  between 
the  two  parts  of  the  court.  The  court  of  appeals  shall  cause  a 
calendar  of  appeals  pending  therein  to  be  made  and  published  at 
least  once  in  each  year.  Whenever  on  the  first  day  of  January  in 
any  year  after  the  present  accumulation  of  causes  in  the  court 
of  appeals  shall  have  been  disposed  of  as  above  provided,  there 
shall  be  more  than  five  hundred  causes  pending  undisposed  of  on 
the  calendar,  the  court  shall  in  the  manner  above  provided  desig- 
nate justices  of  the  supreme  court  to  serve  as  associate  judges  of 
the  court  of  appeals,  and  shall  sit  in  two  parts;  the  pending  causes 
shall  be  distributed  between  the  parts  for  disposition  until  the 
number  of  causes  pending  on  the  calendar  shall  be  reduced  to  one 
hundred,  but  not  later  than  until  the  expiration  of  one  year  from 
the  date  of  such  designations,  whereupon  the  justices  so  designated 
shall  return  to  the  supreme  court. 

In  case  of  the  death,  resignation  or  other  disability  of  any  of 
the  justices  of  the  supreme  court  designated  to  serve  as  associate 
judges  of  the  court  of  appeals  as  in  this  article  provided,  the  court 
of  appeals  shall  designate  a  justice  of  the  supreme  court  to  serve 
in  his  place  in  like  manner  as  if  originally  so  designated,  Each 
of  the  justices  of  the  supreme  court  while  serving  as  associate 
judge  of  the  court  of  appeals  as  herein  provided  shall  receive  from 


Article  VIII  35  Doc.  No.  52 

the  state  the  same  compensation  as  the  elected  associate  judges  of 
the  court  of  appeals.  Upon  the  termination  of  the  designation  of 
a  justice  of  the  supreme  court  as  associate  judge  of  the  court  of 
appeals  who  when  so  designated  was  a  justice  of  an  appellate 
division,  he  shall  return  to  such  appellate  division  unless  the  term 
of  his  designation  thereto  shall  have  expired  and  shall  not  have 
been  renewed  by  the  governor.  The  appellate  division  may  desig- 
nate other  justices  of  the  supreme  court  to  sit  in  the  appellate 
division  during  the  absence  of  regularly  assigned  justices  of  such 
division  serving  as  associate  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals,  in  case 
the  business  of  the  appellate  division  shall  render  such  action 
necessary. 

Section  10.  When  a  vacancy  shall  occur  otherwise  than  by 
expiration  of  term,  in  the  office  of  chief  or  associate  judge  of  the 
court  of  appeals,  the  same  shall  be  filled,  for  a  full  term,  at  the 
next  general  election  happening  not  less  than  three  months  after 
such  vacancy  occurs ;  and  until  the  vacancy  shall  be  so  filled,  the 
governor,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  senate,  if  the 
senate  shall  be  in  session,  or  if  not  in  session  the  governor  may  fill 
such  vacancy  by  appointment.  If  any  such  appointment  of  chief 
judge  shall  be  made  from  among  the  associate  judges,  a  temporary 
appointment  of  associate  judge  shall  be  made  in  like  manner;  but 
in  such  case,  the  person  appointed  chief  judge  shall  not  be  deemed 
to  vacate  his  office  of  associate  judge  any  longer  than  until  the 
expiration  of  his  appointment  as  chief  judge.  The  powers  and 
jurisdiction  of  the  court  shall  not  be  suspended  for  want  of  ap- 
pointment or  election,  when  the  number  of  judges  is  sufficient  to 
constitute  a  quorum.  All  appointments  under  this  section  shall 
continue  until  and  including  the  last  day  of  December  next  after 
the  election  at  which  the  vacancy  shall  be  filled. 

Section  11.  After  the  last  day  of  December,  one  thousand  nine 
hundred  and  fifteen,  the  jurisdiction  of  the  court  of  appeals, 
except  where  the  judgment  is  of  death,  or  where  the  appellate  di- 
vision on  reversing  or  modifying  a  judgment  makes  new  findings 
of  fact  and  renders  judgment  thereon,  shall  be  limited  to  the 
review  of  questions  of  law.  Appeals  may  be  taken  as  of  right  to 
the  court  of  appeals  in  the  following  cases  only : 

(1)  Where  the  judgment  is  of  death  ; 

(2)  From  a  judgment  or  order  entered  upon  the  derision  of  an 
appellate  division  of  the  supreme  court  which  finally  determines 
an  action  or  special  proceeding  where  is  directly  involved  the  eon- 


Doc.  Xo.  52  36  Article  VIII 

struction  of  the  constitution  of  the  state  or  of  the  United  States, 
or  where  one  or  more  of  the  justices  who  heard  the  case  dissents 
from  the  decision  of  the  court,  or  where  the  judgment  of  the  trial 
court  is  reversed  or  modi  lied; 

(3)  From  an  order  of  an  appellate  division  of  the  supreme 
court  granting  a  new  trial  where  the  appellant  stipulates  that  upon 
affirmance  judgment  absolute  shall  he  rendered  against  him. 

The  court  of  appeals  may,  however,  allow  an  appeal  in  any  case 
where  in  its  opinion  a  question  of  law  is  involved,  which  ought  to 
he  reviewed. 

The  legislature  may  further  restrict  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
court  of  appeals  and  the  right  of  appeal  thereto,  hut  the  right  to 
appeal  shall  not  depend  upon  the  amount  involved. 

The  provisions  of  this  section  shall  not  apply  to  appeals  taken 
to  the  court  of  appeals  before  the  last  day  of  December,  one 
thousand  nine  hundred  and  fifteen,  but  the  judgments  or  orders 
appealed  from  shall  be  reviewed  under  existing  provisions  of  law. 

The  court  of  appeals  may  determine  the  qualifications  and  pre- 
scribe the  rules  regulating  the  admission  to  practice  of  attorneys 
and  counselors  in  the  courts  of  the  state. 

Section  12.  The  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals  and  the  justices 
of  the  supreme  court  shall  not  hold  any  other  office  or  public  trust. 
All  votes  for  any  of  them,  for  any  other  than  a  judicial  office, 
given  by  the  legislature  or  the  people,  shall  be  void. 

Section  13.  Judges  of  the  court  of  appeals  and  justices  of 
the  supreme  court  may  be  removed  by  concurrent  resolution  of 
both  houses  of  the  legislature,  if  two-thirds  of  all  the  members 
elected  to  each  house  concur  therein.  All  other  judicial  officers, 
except  justices  of  the  peace  and  judges  or  justices  of  inferior 
courts  not  of  record,  may  be  removed  by  the  senate,  on  the  recom- 
mendation of  the  governor,  if  two-thirds  of  all  the  members 
elected  to  the  senate  concur  therein.  But  no  officer  shall  be  re- 
moved by  virtue  of  this  section  except  for  cause,  which  shall  be 
entered  on  the  journals,  nor  unless  he  shall  have  been  served  with 
a  statement  of  the  cause  alleged,  and  shall  have  had  an  oppor- 
tunity to  be  heard.  On  the  question  of  removal,  the  yeas  and 
nays  shall  be  entered  on  the  journal. 

Section  14.  No  person  shall  hold  the  office  of  judge,  justice  of 
any  court  or  surrogate  longer  than  until  and  including  the  last 
day  of  December  next  niter  he  shall  be  seventy  years  of  age.   Each 


Article  VIII  67  Doc.  No.  52 

justice  of  the  supreme  court  shall  receive  from  the  state  an  annual 
salary  of  ten  thousand  dollars.  Those  assigned  to  the  appellate 
divisions  in  the  third  and  fourth  departments  shall  each  receive 
in  addition  the  sum  of  two  thousand  dollars,  and  the  presiding 
justices  thereof  the  sum  of  two  thousand  five  hundred  dollars 
per  year.  The  justices  now  in  office  or  hereafter  elected  in  the 
first  and  second  judicial  departments  shall  continue  to  receive 
from  their  respective  cities,  counties  or  districts,  as  now  provided 
by  law,  such  additional  compensation  as  will  make  their  aggregate 
compensation  what  they  are  now  receiving.  Those  justices  elected 
in  any  judicial  department  other  than  the  first  or  second,  and 
assigned  to  the  appellate  divisions  of  the  first  or  second  depart- 
ments shall,  while  so  assigned,  receive  from  those  departments 
respectively,  as  now  provided  by  law,  such  additional  sum  as  is 
paid  to  the  justices  of  those  departments.  A  justice  elected  in 
the  third  or  fourth  department  assigned  by  the  appellate  division 
or  designated  by  the  governor  to  hold  a  trial  or  special  term 
in  the  first  or  second  judicial  department  shall  receive  in 
addition  twenty  dollars  per  clay  for  expenses  while  actually 
so  engaged  in  holding  such  term,  which  shall  be  paid  by  the 
state  and  charged  upon  the  judicial  district  where  the  service  is 
rendered.  The  compensation  herein  provided  shall  be  in  lieu  of 
and  shall  exclude  all  other  compensation  and  allowance  to  such 
justices  for  expenses  of  every  kind  and  nature  whatsoever.  The 
provisions  of  this  section  shall  apply  to  the  judges  and  justices 
now  in  office  and  to  those  hereafter  elected.  Except  in  the  case 
of  the  consolidation  of  the  offices  of  county  judge  and  surrogate, 
or  to  make  the  compensation  of  the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals 
equal  to  that  of  any  justice  of  the  supreme  court,  the  compensation 
of  a  judge  or  justice  of  any  court  of  record  in  the  state  shall  be 
neither  increased  nor  decreased  during  the  term  of  office  for  which 
he  was  elected  or  appointed. 

Section  15.  The  assembly  shall  have  the  power  of  impeach- 
ment, by  a  vote  of  a  majority  of  all  the  members  elected.  The 
court  for  the  trial  of  impeachments  shall  be  composed  of  the  presi- 
dent of  the  senate,  the  senators,  or  the  major  part  of  them,  and 
the  judges  of  the  court  of  appeals,  or  the  major  part  of  them.  On 
the  trial  of  an  impeachment  against  the  governor  or  lieutenant- 
governor,  neither  the  lieutenant-governor  nor  the  temporary  presi- 
dent of  the  senate  shall  act  as  a  member  of  the  court.  The  court 
for  the  trial  of  impeachments  may  order  all  or  any  part  of  the 


Doc.   No.  52  38  Article   VIII 

testimony  to  bo  taken  and  reported  by  a  committee  composed  of 
members  of  the  court,  except  that  the  impeached  officer  must  be 
allowed  to  testify  before  the  court  if  he  so  desire.  No  judicial 
officer  shall  exercise  his  office,  after  articles  of  impeachment 
against  him  shall  have  been  preferred  to  the  senate,  until  he  shall 
have  been  acquitted.  Before  the  trial  of  an  impeachment  the 
members  of  the  court  shall  take  an  oath  or  affirmation  truly  and 
impartially  to  try  the  impeachment  according  to  the  evidence, 
and  no  person  shall  be  convicted  without  the  concurrence  of  two- 
thirds  of  the  members  present.  Judgment  in  cases  of  impeach- 
ment shall  not  extend  further  than  to  removal  from  office,  or  re- 
moval from  office  and  disqualification  to  hold  and  enjoy  any  office 
of  honor,  trust  or  profit  under  this  state ;  but  the  party  impeached 
shall  be  liable  to  indictment  and  punishment  according  to  law. 

Section  16.  The  existing  county  courts  are  continued,  and  the 
judges  thereof  now  in  office  shall  hold  their  offices  until  the  ex- 
piration of  their  respective  terms  except  that  the  county  courts 
in  the  counties  of  Kings,  Queens,  Richmond  and  Bronx  shall  be 
abolished  and  the  county  judges  transferred  as  provided  in  this 
article.  The  number  of  county  judges  in  any  county  may  be  in- 
creased, from  time  to  time,  by  the  legislature,  to  such  number 
that  the  total  number  of  county  judges  in  any  one  county  shall 
not  exceed  one  for  every  two  hundred  thousand,  or  major  fraction 
thereof,  of  the  population  of  such  county.  The  additional  county 
judges  whoso  offices  may  be  created  by  the  legislature  shall  be 
chosen  at  the  general  election  held  in  the  first  odd-numbered  year 
after  the  creation  of  such  office.  All  county  judges,  including 
successors  to  existing  judges,  shall  be  chosen  by  the  electors  of  the 
counties  for  the  term  of  six  years  from  and  including  the  first 
day  of  January  following  their  election.  Except  as  in  this  article 
otherwise  provided  county  courts  shall  have  the  powers  and  juris- 
diction now  prescribed  by  the  legislature,  and  also  original  juris- 
diction in  actions  for  the  recovery  of  money  only,  where  all  tho 
defendants  reside  in  the  county,  and  in  which  the  complaint  de- 
mands judgment  for  a  sum  not  exceeding  three  thousand  dollars. 
The  legislature  may  hereafter  enlarge  or  restrict  the  jurisdiction 
of  the  county  courts,  provided,  however,  that  their  jurisdiction 
shall  not  be  so  extended  as  to  authorize  an  action  therein  for  the 
recovery  of  money  only,  in  which  (1)  the  sum  demanded  exceeds 
three  thousand  dollars,  or  (2)  in  which  any  person  not  a  resident 
of  tho  county  is  a  defendant,  unless  such  defendant  have  an  office 


Article  VIII  3<J  Doc.  No.  52 

for  tho  transaction  of  business  within  the  county  and  the  cause  of 
action  arose  therein.  Every  county  judge  and  special  county  judge 
in  counties  having  tho  same  shall  perform  such  duties  as  may  be 
required  by  law.  His  salary  shall  be  established  by  law,  payable 
out  of  the  county  treasury.  A.  county  judge  of  any  county  may 
hold  county  courts  in  any  other  county  when  requested  by  the 
judge  of  such  other  county. 

Section  17.  The  existing  surrogates'  courts  are  continued,  and 
tho  surrogates  now  in  office  shall  hold  their  offices  until  the  ex- 
piration of  their  terms.  Their  successors  shall  be  chosen  by  the 
electors  of  their  respective  counties,  and  their  terms  of  office  shall 
be  six  years,  except  in  the  county  of  New  York,  where  they  shall 
continue  to  be  fourteen  years.  Surrogates  and  surrogates'  courts 
shall  have  the  jurisdiction  and  powers  now  prescribed  by  tho 
legislature  until  otherwise  provided  by  law.  The  county  judge 
shall  bo  surrogate  of  his  county,  except  where  a  separate  surro- 
gate has  been  or  shall  be  elected.  In  counties  having  a  popu- 
lation exceeding  forty  thousand,  wherein  there  is  no  separate 
surrogate,  the  legislature  may  provide  for  the  election  of  a  sepa- 
rate officer  to  be  surrogate,  whose  term  of  office  shall  be  six 
years.  When  the  surrogate  shall  be  elected  as  a  separate  officer 
his  salary  shall  be  established  by  law,  payable  out  of  the  county 
treasury.  Vacancies  occurring  in  the  office  of  judge  of  the  court 
of  general  sessions  of  the  city  of  New  York,  judge  of  the  city 
court  of  New  York,  county  judge,  special  county  judge  or  surro- 
gate shall  be  filled  in  the  same  manner  as  like  vacancies  occurring 
in  the  supreme  court.  For  the  relief  of  surrogates'  courts  the 
legislature  may  confer  upon  the  supreme  court  in  any  county 
having  a  population  exceeding  four  hundred  thousand,  the  powers 
and  jurisdiction  of  surrogates.  A  surrogate  of  any  county  may 
hold  a  surrogate's  court  in  any  other  county  when  requested  by 
the  surrogate  of  such  other  county.  The  legislature  may  at  any 
time  consolidate  the  offices  of  county  judge  and  surrogate  in  any 
county. 

Section  18.  The  legislature  may,  on  application  of  the  board 
of  supervisors,  provide  for  the  election  of  local  officers,  not  to 
exceed  two  in  any  county,  to  discharge  the  duties  of  county  judge 
and  of  surrogate,  in  cases  of  their  inability  or  of  a  vacancy,  and 
in  such  other  cases  as  may  be  provided  by  law,  and  to  exercise  such 
other  powers  in  special  cases  as  are  or  may  be  provided  by  law. 


Doc.  No.  52  40  Article  VIII 

Section  19.  The  electors  of  the  several  towns  shall,  at  their 
annual  town  meetings,  or  at  such  other  time  and  in  such  manner  as 
the  legislature  may  direct,  elect  justices  of  the  peace,  whose  term 
of  office  shall  be  four  years.  In  case  of  an  election  to  fill  a  vacancy 
occurring  before  the  expiration  of  a  full  term,  they  shall  hold  for 
the  remainder  of  the  unexpired  term.  Their  number,  classification 
and  duties  shall  be  regulated  by  law.  Justices  of  the  peace  and 
judges  or  justices  of  inferior  courts  not  of  record,  and  their  clerks, 
may  be  removed  for  cause,  after  due  notice  and  an  opportunity 
of  being  heard  by  such  courts  as  are  or  may  be  prescribed  by 
law.  Justices  of  the  peace,  city  magistrates  and  all  other  judicial 
officers  whose  election  or  appointment  is  not  otherwise  provided 
for  in  this  article  may  be  elected  in  the  several  cities  of  this  state, 
or  in  any  boroughs  contained  within  a  city,  or  within  districts 
created  for  that  purpose  or  may  be  appointed  by  some  local  authori- 
ties of  the  several  cities,  in  such  manner  and  with  such  powers 
and  for  such  terms,  respectively,  as  are  or  may  be  prescribed  by 
law.  The  boards  of  supervisors  or  other  officials  exercising  power 
now  vested  in  such  boards  may  fix  the  compensation  to  be  paid  or 
allowed  to  justices  of  the  peace  in  towns  and  cities  for  their  serv- 
ices in  criminal  matters. 

Section  20.  The  court  of  general  sessions  in  and  for  the  city 
and  county  of  ISTew  York  is  continued,  and  from  and  after  the  first 
day  of  January,  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  seventeen,  it  shall 
have  the  same  jurisdiction  and  powers  throughout  the  city  of  New 
York,  under  the  name  of  the  court  of  general  sessions  of  the  city 
of  ISTew  York,  as  it  now  possesses  within  the  county  of  New  York. 
It  shall  consist  of  the  judges  then  in  office  and  the  judges  trans- 
ferred thereto  by  this  section,  all  of  whom  shall  continue  to  be 
judges  of  the  court  of  general  sessions  of  the  city  of  ISTew  York 
for  the  remainder  of  the  terms  for  which  they  respectively  were 
elected  or  appointed.  The  county  courts  of  Kings,  Queens,  Rich- 
mond and  Bronx  are  abolished  from  and  after  the  first  day  of 
January,  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  seventeen.  The  judges 
of  such  courts  then  in  office  shall  for  the  remainder  of  the  terms 
for  which  they  were  elected  or  appointed,  he  judges  of  the  court 
of  genera]  sessions  »>f  the  city  of  New  York.  The  successors  to 
the  judges  who  were  elected  or  appointed  as  judges  of  the  court 
of  general  sessions  in  and  for  the  city  and  county  of  New  York 
shall  he  elected  by  the  electors  within  the  county  of  New  York, 
and  the  successors  to  the  judges  who  were  elected  or  appointed 


Article   VII]  41  Dor.    No.  52 

as  judges  of  the  county  courts  of  Kings,  Queens,  Richmond  and 
Bronx,  respectively,  shall  be  elected  by  the  electors  within  each 
of  such  respective  counties,  so  that  the  court  of  general  sessions 
of  the  city  of  New  York  shall  consist  of  seven  judges  resident  in 
and  elected  by  the  electors  within  the  county  of  New  York,  five 
judges  resident  in  and  elected  by  the  electors  in  the  county  of 
Kings,  and  one  judge  resident  in  and  elected  by  the  electors  in 
each  of  the  counties  of  Queens,  Richmond  and  Bronx.  The 
legislature  may  in  its  discretion  authorize  the  election  of  one  addi- 
tional judge  to  reside  in  and  be  chosen  by  the  electors  in  the  county 
of  Bronx.  The  judges  who  were  elected  or  appointed  as  judges  of 
the  court  of  general  sessions  in  and  for  the  city  and  county  of  New 
York,  and  the  judges  elected  or  appointed  as  judges  of  the  county 
court  of  the  counties  of  Kings,  Queens,  Richmond  and  Bronx,  shall 
until  the  expiration  of  the  term  for  which  they  were  appointed  or 
elected,  be  respectively  paid  by  the  city,  the  compensation  now 
fixed  by  law.  The  successors  of  all  of  the  judges  of  the  court  of 
general  sessions  of  the  city  of  New  York  shall  be  elected  as 
hereinafter  provided  for  a  term  of  fourteen  years,  and  their 
compensation  shall  be  fixed  by  the  legislature.  The  judges  of 
the  court  of  general  sessions  of  the  city  of  New  York  shall  choose 
one  of  their  own  number  to  be  the  presiding  judge  thereof,  who 
shall  act  as  such  for  a  period  of  five  years  or  until  the  earlier  ex- 
piration of  his  term  of  office,  and  who  shall  be  charged  with  the 
general  administration  of  the  court,  and  assign  the  judges  to 
hold  the  terms  thereof,  subject  to  such  regulations  as  the  pre- 
siding justices  of  the  appellate  divisions  of  the  supreme  court  in 
the  first  and  second  departments  shall  from  time  to  time  prescribe. 
The  judges  shall  have  power  to  appoint  and  remove  a  clerk,  who 
shall  keep  his  office  at  a  place  to  be  designated  by  the  court. 
All  criminal  prosecutions  and  proceedings  on  the  first  day  of 
January,  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  seventeen,  pending  in 
such  county  courts  shall  thereupon  be  transferred  to  the  court  of 
general  sessions  of  the  city  of  New  York  for  hearing  and  deter- 
mination at  terms  held  within  the  counties  in  which  the  same  are 
pending.  Until  the  legislature  shall  otherwise  provide  the  clerk  of 
the  court  of  general  sessions  in  and  for  the  city  and  county  of  New 
York  and  the  chief  clerk  of  the  county  court  in  each  of  the  counties 
of  Kings,  Queens,  Richmond  and  Bronx,  shall  act  within  his 
county  as  clerk  of  the  court  of  general  sessions  of  the  city  of  New 
York,  and  the  presiding  judge  of  such  court  shall  make  such  rules 


Doc.   No.   52  42  Article  VIII 

and  regulations  respecting  such  clerks'  offices  and  the  distribution 
of  the  business  of  the  court  in  the  said  several  counties  as  from 
time  to  time  may  be  expedient 

Section  21.  The  city  court  of  the  city  of  New  York  is  continued, 
and  from  and  after  the  first  day  of  January,  one  thousand  nine 
hundred  and  seventeen,  it  shall  have  the  same  jurisdiction  and 
power  throughout  the  city  of  New  York,  under  the  name  of  the 
city  court  of  New  York,  as  it  now  possesses  within  the  county  of 
New  York  and  the  county  of  Bronx  and  original  jurisdiction  in 
actions  for  the  recovery  of  money  only  in  which  the  complaint 
demands  judgment  for  a  sum  not  exceeding  three  thousand  dol- 
lars. Such  court  shall  have  likewise  the  equity  jurisdiction  now 
possessed  by  county  courts  but  such  jurisdiction  shall  be  exercised 
only  within  the  respective  counties  of  such  city  by  the  judges 
elected  within  such  counties.  It  shall  consist  of  the  judges 
then  in  office  who  shall  continue  to  lie  judges  of  the  court  for  the 
remainder  of  the  terms  for  which  they  respectively  were  elected  or 
appointed,  and  the  additional  judges  to  be  elected  as  provided  in 
this  section.  The  judges  who  were  elected  or  appointed  as  judges 
of  the  city  court  of  the  city  of  New  York,  until  the  expiration  of 
the  terms  for  which  they  were  respectively  elected  or  appointed, 
shall  be  paid  the  salaries  now  fixed  by  law  for  such  judges.  Their 
successors  shall  be  elected  by  the  electors  of  the  county  of  New 
York  and  shall  hold  office  for  ten  years.  There  shall  also  be  five 
additional  judges,  two  of  whom  shall  reside  in  and  be  chosen  by 
the  electors  of  the  county  of  Kings,  and  one  of  whom  shall  reside 
in  and  be  chosen  by  the  electors  in  each  of  the  counties  of  Bronx, 
Kichmond  and  Queens,  all  of  whom  shall  be  elected  at  the  general 
election  in  November,  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  sixteen,  and 
they  and  their  successors,  who  shall  be  chosen  in  like  manner,  shall 
hold  office  for  ten  years.  Until  the  legislature  shall  otherwise  pro- 
vide the  judge  of  the  city  court  chosen  in  the  county  of  Richmond 
shall  be  surrogate  of  that  county.  The  legislature  may  provide  for 
a  surrogate  for  the  county  of  Richmond.  The  legislature  may  in 
its  discretion  authorize  the  election  of  two  additional  judges,  one 
to  reside  in  and  be  chosen  by  the  electors  of  the  respective  counties 
of  Bronx  and  Kings.  The  judges  elected  as  in  this  section 
provided  shall  receive  from  the  city  a  compensation  to  be  fixed 
by  the  legislature.  The  judges  of  the  city  court  of  New  York 
shall  choose  one  of  their  own  number  to  be  the  presiding  judge 
thereof  who   shall   be   charged    with    the   general    administration 


Aim'u  le  VI 1 1  £3  Doc.   Xo.   ~>- 

of  the  court  and  assign  the  jud  ;es  to  hold  the  terms  thereof, 
subject  to  such  regulations  as  the  presiding  justices  of  the  ap- 
pellate divisions  of  the  supreme  court  in  the  first  and  second 
departments  shall  from  time  to  time  prescribe.  The  judges  shall 
have  power  to  appoint  and  remove  a  clerk,  who  shall  keep  his 
office  at  a  place  to  he  designated  by  the  court.  All  civil  actions  or 
proceedings  on  the  first  day  of  January,  one  thousand  nine  hun- 
dred and  seventeen,  pending  in  the  county  courts  of  the  counties  of 
Kings,  Queens,  Richmond  and  Bronx,  respectively,  shall  there- 
upon be  transferred  to  the  city  court  of  Xew  York  for  hearing  and 
determination,  which  court  for  the  purpose  only  of  such  hearing 
and  determination  and  the  enforcement  of  the  judgments  rendered 
thereon  shall  have  and  exercise  the  jurisdiction  previously  vested 
in  the  respective  county  courts  from  which  such  cases  are  so  trans- 
ferred, at  terms  held  within  the  counties  in  which  the  same  are 
pending.  Until  the  legislature  shall  otherwise  provide,  the  clerk 
of  the  city  court  of  the  city  of  Xew  York  and  the  chief  clerk 
of  the  county  court  in  each  of  the  counties  of  Kings,  Queens, 
Richmond  and  Bronx,  shall  act  within  his  county  as  clerk  of  the 
city  court  of  Yew  York,  and  the  presiding  judge  of  the  court  shall 
make  such  rules  and  regulations  respecting  the  clerks'  offices  and 
the  distribution  of  the  business  of  the  court  in  the  said  several 
enmities  as  from  time  to  time  may  be  expedient,  subject  to  regu- 
lations of  the  presiding  justices  of  the  first  and  second  depart- 
ments as  aforesaid. 

Section  22.  Inferior  local  courts  of  civil  and  criminal  juris- 
diction may  be  established  by  the  legislature,  but  no  inferior  local 
court  created  after  the  first  day  of  January,  one  thousand  eight 
hundred  and  ninety-five,  shall  be  a  court  of  record.  Except  as 
herein  provided  the  legislature  shall  not  hereafter  confer  upon 
any  inferior  local  court  of  its  creation  any  equity  jurisdiction  or 
any  greater  jurisdiction  in  other  respects  than  is  conferred  upon 
county  courts  by  or  under  this  article. 

The  legislature  may.  however,  provide  that  the  territorial  juris- 
diction of  any  inferior  local  court  now  existing  or  hereafter  es- 
tablished in  any  city  or  village  or  of  justices  of  the  peace  in  •■ 
shall  extend  throughout  the  county  in  which  such  court  or  justice 
is  located,  and  also  throughout  such  city  or  village  irrespective  of 
town  or  county  lines.  The  legislature  may  also  create  civil  divi- 
sions consisting  of  not  to  exceed  three  contiguon  towns  or  parts 
thereof  for  the  purpose  of  establishing  therein  inferior  local  courts 


Doc.   No.   52  44  Article  VI II 

having  territorial  jurisdiction  throughout  the  county  or  counties 
in  which  such  towns  are  situated.  The  legislature  may  confer 
upon  any  inferior  local  court  power  to  try  without  a  jury  offenses 
of  the  grade  of  misdemeanor.  The  legislature  may  establish  chil- 
dren's courts,  and  courts  of  domestic  relations,  as  separate  courts, 
or  parts  of  existing  courts  or  courts  hereafter  to  be  created,  and 
may  confer  upon  them  such  equity  and  other  jurisdiction  as  may 
be  necessary  for  the  correction,  protection,  guardianship  and  dis- 
position of  delinquent,  neglected  or  dependent  minors,  and  for 
the  punishment  and  correction  of  adults  responsible  for  or  contrib- 
uting to  such  delinquency,  neglect  or  dependency,  and  of  all  per- 
sons legally  chargeable  with  the  support  of  a  wife  or  children  who 
abandon  or  neglect  to  support  either.  In  the  exercise  of  such 
jurisdiction  such  courts  may  hear  and  determine  such  causes,  with 
or  without  a  jury,  except  those  involving  a  felony.  Except  as 
in  this  article  otherwise  provided,  all  judicial  officers  shall  be 
elected  or  appointed  at  such  times  and  in  such  manner  as  the  legis- 
lature may  direct. 

Section  23.  Clerks  of  the  several  counties  shall  be  clerks  of 
the  supreme  court,  with  such  powers  and  duties  as  shall  be  pre- 
scribed by  law.  The  justices  of  the  appellate  division  in  each  de- 
partment shall  have  power  to  appoint  and  to  remove  a  clerk  who 
shall  keep  his  office  at  a  place  to  bo  designated  by  such  justices. 
The  clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals  shall  keep  his  office  at  the  seat  of 
government.  The  clerk  of  the  court  of  appeals  and  the  clerks  of 
the  appellate  divisions  shall  receive  compensation  to  be  established 
by  law  and  paid  out  of  the  public  treasury. 

Section  24.  jS"o  judicial  officer,  except  justices  of  the  peace, 
shall  receive  to  his  own  use  any  fees  or  perquisites  of  office;  nor 
shall  any  judge  of  the  court  of  appeals,  or  justice  of  the  supreme 
court,  or  any  county  judge  or  surrogate  hereafter  elected  in  a 
county  having  a  population  exceeding  one  hundred  and  twenty 
thousand,  practice  as  an  attorney  or  counselor  in  any  court  of 
record  in  I  Ins  state,  or  act  as  referee.  The  legislature  may  im- 
pose a  similar  prohibition  upon  county  judges  ami  surrogates  in 
other  counties.  X<>  one  shall  he  eligible  to  the  office  of  judge 
of  the  court  of  appeals,  justice  of  the  supreme  court,  or,  except 
in  the  county  of  Hamilton,  to  the  office  of  county  judge  or  surro- 
gate, who  is  not  an  attorney  and  counselor  of  this  state. 

Section  25.  The  legislature  shall  provide  for  the  speedy  pub- 
lication of  all  statutes,  civil  practice  rules  and  rules  of  court,  and 


Article  VIII  45  Doc.   No.  52 

the  collection,  compilation  and  publication  annually  of  the  civil 
and  criminal  judicial  statistics  of  the  state,  and  shall  regulate 
the  reporting  of  the  decisions  of  the  courts;  but  all  laws  and  judi- 
cial decisions  shall  he  free  for  publication  by  any  person. 

Section  26.  Justices  of  the  peace  and  other  local  judicial  officers 
provided  for  in  sections  nineteen  and  twenty-two,  in  office  when  this 
article  takes  effect,  shall  hold  their  offices  until  the  expiration 
of  their  respective  terms. 

Section  27.  Courts  of  special  sessions  and  inferior  local  courts 
of  similar  character  shall  have  such  jurisdiction  of  offenses  of  the 
grade  of  misdemeanors  as  may  be  prescribed  by  law. 

Section  28.  Commissioners  of  jurors  now  in  office  shall  held 
their  offices  until  the  expiration  of  their  respective  terms.  The 
legislature  may  provide  for  the  appointment  of  a  commissioner  of 
jurors  in  any  county;  in  a  county  in  the  first  and  second  judicial 
districts,  by  the  respective  appellate  divisions  of  the  supreme  court 
embracing  those  districts,  and  in  a  county  in  the  other  judicial 
districts,  by  the  justices  of  the  supreme  court  resident  in  the  judi- 
cial district  embracing  such  county.  The  legislature  shall  define 
the  duties  of  commissioners  of  jurors,  fix  their  terms  of  office  and' 
their  compensation  which  shall  be  a  county  charge. 

Section  29.  Laws  may  be  passed  to  provide  for  a  system  of 
judicial  authentication,  registration  and  guaranty  by  the  state,  or 
by  any  county  thereof,  of  titles  to  real  property,  the  determination 
of  adverse  claims  to  and  interests  therein,  and  the  establishment  by 
means  of  fees  or  otherwise  of  assurance  funds  to  make  such  sys- 
tem operative.  Such  administrative  powers  as  are  necessary  may 
be  conferred  on  existing  courts  of  record. 

ARTICLE  IX. 
Section  1.   The  credit  of  the  state  shall  not  in  any  manner  be 
given  or  loaned  to  or  in  aid  of  any  individual,  association  or  cor- 
poration. 

Section  2.  The  state  may  contract  debts  in  anticipation  of  the 
receipt  of  taxes  and  revenues,  direct  or  indirect,  for  the  purposes 
and  within  the  amounts  of  appropriations  theretofore  made;  bonds 
or  other  obligations  for  the  moneys  so  borrowed  shall  be  issued  as 
may  be  provided  by  law,  and  shall  with  the  interest  thereon  be  paid 
from  such  taxes  and  revenues  within  one  year  from  the  date  of 
issue. 


Doc.  Ko.   52  40  Article   IX 

Section  3.  In  addition  to  the  above  limited  power  to  contract 
debts,  the  state  may  contract  debts  to  repel  invasion,  suppress  in- 
surrection, or  defend  the  state  in  war ;  but  the  money  arising  from 
the  contracting  of  such  debts  shall  be  applied  to  the  purpose  for 
which  it  was  raised,  or  to  repay  such  debts,  and  to  no  other  pur- 
pose whatever. 

Section  4.  Except  the  debts  specified  in  sections  two  and  three 
of  this  article,  no  debt  shall  be  hereafter  contracted  by  or  in  behalf 
of  this  state,  unless  such  debt  shall  be  authorized  by  law,  for  some 
single  wort  or  object,  to  be  distinctly  specified  therein.  On  the 
final  passage  of  such  bill  in  either  house  of  the  legislature,  the 
question  shall  be  taken  by  yeas  and  nays,  to  be  duly  entered  on  the 
journals  thereof,  and  shall  be:  "  Shall  this  bill  pass  and  ought  the 
same  to  receive  the  sanction  of  the  people  ?  "  Xo  such  law  shall 
take  effect  until  it  shall,  at  a  general  election,  have  been  submitted 
to  the  people,  and  have  received  a  majority  of  all  the  votes  cast 
for  and  against  it  at  such  election  nor  shall  it  be  submitted  to  be 
voted  on  within  three  months  after  its  passage  nor  at  any  general 
election  when  any  other  law,  or  any  bill  shall  be  submitted  to  be 
voted  for  or  against.  The  legislature  may,  at  any  time  after  the 
approval  of  such  law  by  the  people,  if  no  debt  shall  have  been 
contracted  in  pursuance  thereof,  repeal  the  same;  and  may  at  any 
time  by  law  forbid  the  contracting  of  any  further  debt  or  liability 
under  such  law. 

Except  the  debts  specified  in  sections  two  and  three  of  this 
article,  all  debts  contracted  by  the  state  after  the  second  day  of 
Xovember,  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  fifteen,  pursuant  to 
an  authorization  therefor,  heretofore  or  hereafter  made  and  each 
portion  of  any  such  debt  from  time  to  time  so  contracted  i '.'re- 
spective of  the  terms  of  such  authorization,  shall  be  paid  in  equal 
annual  instalments,  the  first  of  which  shall  be  payable  not  more 
than  one  year,  and  the  last  of  which  shall  be  payable  not  more 
than  fifty  years,  after  such  debt  or  portion  thereof  shall  have 
been  contracted.  Xo  such  debt  hereafter  authorized  shall  be  con- 
tracted for  a  period  longer  than  that  of  the  probable  life  of  the 
work  or  object  for  which  the  debt  is  to  be  contracted,  to  be  deter- 
mined by  general  laws,  which  determination  shall  be  conclusive. 

The  legislature  may  from  time  to  time  alter  the  rate  of  interest 
i"  be  paid  upon  any  state  debt,  which  has  been  or  may  be  author- 
ized pursuant  to  the  provisions  of  this  section  or  upon  any  pari 
of     uch  debt,  provided,  however,  that  the  rate  of  interest  shall  UOt 


Article   IX  47  Doc.   No.   52 

be  altered  upon  any  part  of  such  debt  or  upon  any  bond  or  other 
evidence  thereof  which  has  been  or  shall  be  created  or  issued  be- 
fore such  alteration. 

The  money  arising  from  any  loan  creating  such  debt  or  liability 
shall  be  applied  to  the  work  or  object  specified  in  the  act  authoriz- 
ing such  debt  or  liability,  or  for  the  payment  of  such  debt  or  lia- 
bility and  for  no  other  purpose  whatever. 

Section  5.  The  sinking  funds  provided  for  the  payment  of  in- 
terest and  the  extinguishment  of  the  principal  of  the  debts  of  the 
state  heretofore  contracted  shall  be  continued ;  they  shall  be  sepa- 
rately kept  and  safely  invested  and  neither  of  them  shall  be  ap- 
propriated or  used  in  any  manner  other  than  for  such  payment  and 
extinguishment  as  hereinafter  provided.  The  comptroller  shall 
each  year  appraise  the  securities  held  for  investment  in  each  of 
such  funds  at  their  fair  market  value  not  exceeding  par.  He  shall 
then  determine  and  certify  to  the  legislature  the  amount  of  each 
of  such  funds  and  the  amounts  which,  if  thereafter  annually  con- 
tributed to  each  such  fund,  would,  with  the  fund  and  with  the 
accumulations  thereon  and  upon  the  contributions  thereto,  com- 
puted at  the  rate  of  three  per  centum  per  annum,  produce  at  the 
date  of  maturity  the  amount  of  the  debt  to  retire  which  such  fund 
was  created,  and  the  legislature  shall  thereupon  appropriate  as 
the  contribution  to  each  such  fund  for  such  year  at  least  the 
amount  thus  certified. 

If  the  income  of  any  such  fund  in  any  year  is  more  than  a  sum 
which,  if  annually  added  to  such  fund  would,  with  the  fund  and 
its  accumulations  as  aforesaid,  retire  the  debt  at  maturity,  the  ex- 
cess income  may  be  applied  to  the  interest  on  the  debt  for  which 
the  fund  was  created. 

After  any  sinking  fund  shall  equal  in  amount  the  debt  for 
which  it  was  created  no  further  contribution  shall  be  made  thereto 
except  to  make  good  any  losses  ascertained  at  the  annual  ap- 
praisals above  mentioned,  and  the  income  thereof  shall  be  applied 
to  the  payment  of  the  interest  on  such  debt.  Any  excess  in  such 
income  not  required  for  the  payment  of  interest  may  be  applied  to 
the  general  fund  of  the  state. 

The  legislature  may  also  by  general  laws  provide  means  and 
authority  whereby  outstanding  bonds  of  the  state,  for  which  sink- 
ing funds  are  provided,  may  lie  exchanged  at  par  for  cancellation, 
for  serial  bonds  of  the  form  authorized  under  section  four  of  this 
article,  upon  such  terms  and  conditions  as  to  interest  and  other- 


Doc.  No.  52  48  Article  IX 

wise  as  it  may  in  its  discretion  authorize  or  determine,  except  that 
the  debt  as  thus  refunded  shall  finally  mature  no  later  and  at  no 
greater  comparative  cost  to  the  state  than  the  original  debt ;  the 
determination  of  the  legislature  as  to  such  comparative  cost  shall 
be  conclusive.  Xo  further  contributions  to  the  respective  sinking 
funds  shall  be  made  on  account  of  bonds  so  exchanged  and  the 
proportion  of  any  such  sinking  fund  which  the  amount  of  the 
bonds  so  exchanged  shall  bear  to  the  amount  of  bonds  outstanding 
of  the  same  issue  may  be  appropriated,  as  required,  for  the  pay- 
ment of  the  substituted  serial  bonds. 

Section  0.  The  legislature  shall  annually  provide  by  appro- 
priation for  the  payment  of  the  interest  upon  and  instalments 
of  principal  of  all  debts  created  on  behalf  of  the  state  except 
those  contracted  under  section  two  of  this  article,  as  the  same 
shall  fall  due,  and  for  the  contribution  to  all  of  the  sinking  funds 
heretofore  created  by  law,  of  the  amounts  annually  to  be  contrib- 
uted under  the  provisions  of  section  five  of  this  article.  If  at  any 
time  the  legislature  shall  fail  to  make  any  such  appropriation,  the 
comptroller  shall  set  apart  from  the  first  revenues  thereafter  re- 
ceived, applicable  to  the  general  fund  of  the  state,  a  sum  sufficient 
to  pay  such  interest,  instalments  of  principal,  or  contributions  to 
such  sinking  fund,  as  the  case  may  be,  and  shall  so  apply  the 
moneys  thus  set  apart.  The  comptroller  may  be  required  to  set 
aside  and  apply  such  revenues  as  aforesaid,  at  the  suit  of  any 
holder  of  such  bonds. 

Section  7.  Debts  hereafter  authorized  for  the  improvement  of 
highways  shall  be  created  only  in  the  manner  provided  in  section 
four  of  this  article.  Xo  provision  of  this  article  shall  be  deemed 
to  impair  or  affect  the  validity  of  any  debt  of  tlie  state  heretofore 
contracted  or  any  right  or  obligation  heretofore  created  between 
the  state  and  any  of  its  civil  divisions. 

Section  8.  The  moneys  authorized  to  be  raised  by  the  sale  of 
highway  bonds  pursuant  to  the  law  approved  by  vote  of  the  people 
at  the  general  election  held  in  the  year  one  thousand  nine  hundred 
and  twelve,  which  have  been  apportioned  to  certain  counties  in 
excess  (it*  the  sums,  to  be  determined  by  the  comptroller,  which  are 
or  will  lie  required  to  construct  and  improve  the  highways  (.here- 
tofore determined  by  general  laws  to  be  constructed  and  improved 
in  such  counties,  shall  be  applied  by  the  superintendent  of  public 


Article  IX  49  Doc.  No.   52 

works  after  appropriation  by  the  legislature  to  the  construction 
and  improvement  of  such  state  routes  and  portions  thereof,  as 
were  defined  by  law  when  such  bonds  were  authorized,  and  located 
outside  of  such  counties,  as  lie  may  deem  expedient. 

Section  9.  Neither  the  legislature,  canal  board,  nor  any  person 
or  persons  acting  in  behalf  of  the  state,  shall  audit,  allow,  or 
pay  any  claim  which,  as  between  citizens  of  the  state,  would 
bo  barred  by  lapse  of  time.  This  provision  shall  not  be  construed 
to  repeal  any  statute  fixing  the  time  within  which  claims  shall 
be  presented  or  allowed,  nor  shall  it  extend  to  any  claims  duly 
presented  within  the  time  allowed  by  law,  and  prosecuted  with 
due  diligence  from  the  time  of  such  presentment.  But  if  the 
claimant  shall  be  under  legal  disability,  the  claim  may  be  pre- 
sented within  two  years  after  such  disability  is  removed. 

Section  10.  The  legislature  shall  not  sell,  lease  or  otherwise 
dispose  of  the  Erie  canal,  the  Oswego  canal,  the  Champlain  canal, 
the  Cayuga  and  Seneca  canal,  the  Black  River  canal,  or  canal 
terminals  heretofore  or  hereafter  constructed,  nor  shall  any  ease- 
ment in  or  incumbrance  on  such  canals  or  terminals  be  created; 
but  they  shall  remain  the  property  of  the  state  and  under  its 
management  forever.  When  necessary  in  the  opinion  of  the  su- 
perintendent of  public  works,  casements  in  canal  lands  may  be 
granted  for  pin-poses  of  bridge  construction,  provided  that  such 
easements  shall  not  interfere  with  or  impair  the  use  of  the  canals. 
The  canals  to  which  such  prohibition  applies  shall  be  those  now 
known  as  the  Erie,  the  Oswego,  the  Champlain,  the  Cayuga  and 
Seneca,  and  the  Black  River  canals  until  the  barge  canal  improve- 
ment under  chapter  one  hundred  and  forty-seven  of  the  laws  of  one 
thousand  nine  hundred  and  three,  as  heretofore  amended,  and  chap- 
ter three  hundred  and  ninety-one  of  the  laws  of  one  thousand  nine 
hundred  and  nine,  as  heretofore  amended,  shall  have  been  com- 
pleted, when  such  prohibition  shall  apply  only  to  the  said  termi- 
nals, the  Black  River  canal,  the  said  improved  canals,  the  por- 
tions of  existing  canals  heretofore  reserved  for  barge  canal  or 
canal  terminal  purposes  by  statute,  the  existing  inland  Erie  canal 
from  Tonawanda  creek  to  connection  with  the  Black  Rock  harbor, 
those  portions  of  the  Erie  and  Champlain  canals  heretofore  re- 
served by  chapter  two  hundred  and  forty-three  of  the  laws  of  one 
thousand  nine  hundred  and  thirteen  and  canal  slips  numbers  one 
and  two  in  the  city  of  Buffalo;  provided,  however,  that  in  the  city 
of  Utica  that  portion  of  the  existing  Erie  canal  between  Schuyler 


Doc.   No.   52  50  Auticle    IX 

and  Third  streets  may  be  sold  or  otherwise  disposed  of  on  condi- 
tion that  a  flow  of  sufficient  water  from  Schuyler  to  Third  street 
to  feed  that  portion  of  the  canal  east  of  Third  street  be  main- 
tained. The  abandonment,  sale  or  other  disposition  of  canals 
or  canal  property  shall  be  under  and  pursuant  to  general  laws 
only  and  such  laws  shall  secure  to  the  state  the  fair  appraised 
value  of  the  property  which  may  be  abandoned  and  sold.  Such 
general  laws  may  provide  for  the  abandonment  of  portions  of  the 
existing  canals  which  by  reason  of  the  completion  of  parts  of  the 
barge  canals  shall  have  become  unnecessary  for  purposes  of  navi- 
gation and  shall  be  certified  by  the  superintendent  of  public  works 
to  have  become  so. 

Real  property  which  has  been  or  which  may  hereafter  be  ap- 
propriated for  canal  purposes  shall  be  deemed  to  be  held  by  the 
state  in  fee  unless  expressly  taken  for  temporary  purposes. 

The  leasing  of  surplus  waters  of  any  of  the  state  canals  or  canal 
feeders  or  of  any  waters  impounded  by  the  construction  of  dams, 
reservoirs  or  other  structures  shall  hereafter  be  pursuant  to 
general  laws  only,  but  this  provision  shall  not  authorize  the  use 
for  other  than  navigation  purposes  of  water  diverted  from 
the  Black  river  watershed  to  feed  the  Erie  canal.  Xo  such 
lease  nor  the  use  of  waters  thereunder  shall  in  any  way  injure, 
impair,  interfere  with,  or  endanger  navigation  or  the  construction, 
use,  maintenance,  operation  or  safety  of  the  canals  or  of  other 
property  of  the  state.  Each  lease  shall  be  for  a  stated  period  not 
exceeding  thirty  years  and  shall  reserve  to  the  state  the  right, 
whenever  in  the  opinion  of  those  having  charge  of  the  manage- 
ment and  operation  of  the  canals  the  needs  of  navigation  require 
it,  to  terminate  or  suspend  the  same  and  to  regulate  or  alter  the 
amount  of  water  to  be  used  thereunder,  together  with  the  corre- 
sponding compensation  therefor,  without  incurring  liability  upon 
the  part  of  the  state. 

Section  11.  Xo  tolls  shall  hereafter  be  imposed  on  persons  or 
property  transported  on  the  canals,  but  all  boats  navigating  the 
canals  and  the  owners  and  masters  thereof,  shall  be  subject  to 
such  laws  and  regulations  as  have  beer  or  may  hereafter  be  en- 
acted concerning  the  navigation  of  the  canals.  The  legislature 
shall  annually,  by  equitable  taxes,  nuke  provision  for  the  ex 
penses  of  the  superintendence  and  repairs  of  the  canals.  All 
contracts  for  work  or  materials  on  any  canal  shall  be  made  with 
the  persons  who  shall  offer  to  do  or  provide  the  same  at  the  lowest 


Article   IX  51  Doc.   \<>.  52 

price,  with  adequate  security  for  their  performance.  No  extra 
compensation  shall  be  made'  to  any  contractor;  but  if,  from  any 
unforeseen  cause,  the  terms  of  any  contract  shall  prove  to  be  un- 
just and  oppressive,  the  canal  board  may,  upon  the  application  of 
the  contractor,  cancel  such  contract. 

Section  12.  The  canals  may  be  improved  in  such  manner  as 
the  legislature  shall  provide  by  law.  A  debt  may  be  authorized 
for  that  purpose  in  the  mode  prescribed  by  section  four  of  this 
article,  or  the  cost  of  such  improvement  may  be  defrayed  by  the 
appropriation  of  funds  from  the  state  treasury,  or  by  equitable 
annual  tax. 

ARTICLE  X. 

Section  1.  The  power  of  taxation  shall  never  be  surrendered, 
suspended  or  contracted  away,  except  as  to  the  securities  of  the 
state  or  a  civil  division  thereof.  Hereafter  no  exemption  from 
taxation  shall  bo  granted  except  by  general  laws  and  upon  the 
affirmative  vote  of  two-thirds  of  all  the  members  elected  to  each 
house. 

Section  2.  Taxes  shall  be  imposed  by  general  laws  and  for 
public  purposes  only.  The  legislature  shall  prescribe  how  tax- 
able subjects  shall  be  assessed  and  provide  for  officers  to  execute 
laws  relating  to  the  assessment  and  collection  of  taxes,  any  pro- 
vision of  section  two  of  article  thirteen  of  this  constitution  to  the 
contrary  notwithstanding.  The  legislature  shall  provide  for  the 
supervision,  review  and  equalization  of  assessments. 

Section  3.  For  the  assessment  of  real  property,  heretofore 
locally  assessed,  the  legislature  shall  establish  tax  districts,  none 
(if  which,  unless  it  be  a  city,  shall  embrace  more  than  one  county. 
The  assessors  therein  shall  be  elected  by  the  electors  of  such  dis- 
tricts or  appointed  by  such  authorities  thereof  as  shall  be  desig- 
nated by  law.  The  legislature  may  provide  that  the  assessment 
roll  of  each  larger  district  shall  serve  for  all  the  lesser  tax  dis- 
tricts within  its  boundaries.  INTo  such  tax  district  larger  than  a 
town,  except  a  city,  shall  be  established  until  the  law  providing 
therefor  shall  have  been  adopted  by  a  vote  of  a  majority  of  the 
electors  voting  thereon  in  such  proposed  district  at  an  election  for 
which  provision  shall  lie  made  by  law.  The  legislature  may, 
however,  provide  for  the  assessment  by  state  authorities  of  all 
the  property  of  designated  classes  of  public  service  corporations. 


Doc.  JXo.  52  52  Article  XI 

ARTICLE  XI. 
Section  1.  Corporations  may  be  formed  under  general  laws; 
but  shall  not  be  created  by  special  act,  except  for  municipal  pur- 
poses, and  in  cases  where,  in  the  judgment  of  the  legislature, 
the  objects  of  the  corporation  cannot  be  attained  under  general 
laws.  All  general  laws  and  special  acts  passed  pursuant  to  this 
section  may  be  altered  from  time  to  time  or  repealed. 

Section  2.  Dues  from  corporations  shall  be  secured  by  such  in- 
dividual liability  of  the  corporators  and  other  means  as  may  be 
prescribed  by  law. 

Section  3.  The  term  corporations  as  used  in  this  article  shall 
be  construed  to  include  all  associations  and  joint  stock  companies 
having  any  of  the  powers  or  privileges  of  corporations  not  pos- 
sessed by  individuals  or  partnerships.  And  all  corporations  shall 
have  the  right  to  sue  and  shall  be  subject  to  be  sued  in  all  courts 
in  like  cases  as  natural  persons. 

Section  4.  The  legislature  shall,  by  general  law,  conform  all 
charters  of  savings  banks,  or  institutions  for  savings,  to  a  uni- 
formity of  powers,  rights  and  liabilities,  and  all  charters  hereafter 
granted  for  such  corporations  shall  be  made  to  conform  to  such 
general  law,  and  to  such  amendments  as  may  be  made  thereto. 
And  no  such  corporation  shall  have  any  capital  stock,  nor  shall  the 
trustees  thereof,  or  any  of  them,  have  any  interest  whatever, 
direct  or  indirect,  in  the  profits  of  such  corporation;  and  no 
director  or  trustee  of  any  such  bank  or  institution  shall  be  in- 
terested in  any  loan  or  use  of  any  money  or  property  of  such  bank 
or  institution  for  savings.  The  legislature  shall  have  no  power  to 
pass  any  act  granting  any  special  charter  for  banking  purposes; 
but  corporations  or  associations  may  be  formed  for  such  purposes 
under  general  laws. 

Section  5.  The  legislature  shall  have  no  power  to  pass  any  law 
sanctioning  in  any  manner,  directly  or  indirectly,  the  suspen- 
sion of  specie  payments,  by  any  person,  association  or  corporation, 
issuing  bank   notes  of  any  description. 

Section  ('».  The  legislature  shall  provide  by  law  for  the  registry 

of  all  bills  or  notes,  issued  or  put  in  circulation  as  money,  and 
shall  require  ample  security  for  the  redemption  of  the  same  in 
specie. 


Article  XI  53  Doc.  Xo.  52 

Section  7.  The  stockholders  of  every  corporation  and  joint 
stock  association  for  banking  purposes,  shall  be  individually  re- 
sponsible to  the  amount  of  their  respective  share  or  shares  of 
stock  in  any  such  corporation  or  association,  for  all  its  debts  and 
liabilities  of  every  kind. 

Section  8.  In  case  of  the  insolvency  of  any  Lank  or  banking 
association,  the  hillholders  thereof  shall  be  entitled  to  preference 
in  payment,  over  all  other  creditors  of  such  bank  or  association. 

Section  9.  Neither  the  credit  nor  the  money  of  the  state  shall 
be  given  or  loaned  to  or  in  aid  of  any  association,  corporation  or 
private  undertaking.  This  section  shall  not,  however,  prevent 
the  legislature  from  making  such  provision  for  the  education  and 
support  of  the  blind,  the  deaf  and  dumb,  and  juvenile  delinquents, 
as  to  it  may  seem  proper.  Xor  shall  it  apply  to  any  fund  or  prop- 
erly now  held,  or  which  may  hereafter  be  held,  by  the  state  for 
educational  purposes. 

Section  10.  Xo  county,  city,  town  or  village  shall  hereafter 
give  any  money  or  property,  or  loan  its  money  or  credit  to  or  in 
aid  of  any  individual,  association  or  corporation,  or  become  di- 
rectly or  indirectly  the  owner  of  stock  in,  or  bonds  of,  any  associa- 
tion or  corporation  ;  nor  shall  any  such  county,  city,  town  or  village 
be  allowed  to  incur  any  indebtedness  except  for  county,  city,  town 
or  village  purposes.  This  section  shall  not  prevent  snch  county, 
city,  town  or  village  from  making  such  provision  for  the  aid  or 
support  of  its  poor  as  may  be  authorized  by  law. 

Section  11.  Xo  county  or  city  shall  be  allowed  to  become  in- 
debted for  any  purpose  or  in  any  manner  to  an  amount  which,  in- 
cluding existing  indebtedness,  shall  exceed  ten  per  centum  of  the 
assessed  valuation  of  the  real  estate  of  such  county  or  city  subject 
to  taxation,  as  it  appeared  by  the  assessment  rolls  of  such  county  or 
city  on  the  last  assessment  for  state  or  county  taxes  prior  to  the  in- 
curring of  such  indebtedness;  and  all  indebtedness  in  excess 
of  such  limitation,  except  such  as  now  may  exist,  shall  be 
absolutely  void,  except  as  herein  otherwise  provided.  Xo 
county  or  city  whose  present  indebtedness  exceeds  ten  per 
centum  of  the  assessed  valuation  of  its  real  estate  subject 
to  taxation,  shall  be  allowed  to  become  indebted  in  any 
further  amount  until  such  indebtedness  shall  be  reduced  within 
such  limit.  This  section  shall  not  be  construed  to  prevent  the 
issuing'  of  certificates  of  indebtedness  or  revenue  bonds  issued  in 


Doc.  No.   52  54  Article  XI 

anticipation  of  the  collection  of  taxes  for  amounts  actually  con- 
tained, or  to  be  contained  in  the  taxes  for  the  year  when  such 
certificates  or  revenue  bonds  are  issued  and  payable  out  of  such 
taxes;  nor  to  prevent  the  city  of  New  York  from  issuing  bonds 
to  be  redeemed  out  of  the  tax  levy  for  the  year  next  succeeding 
the  year  of  their  issue,  provided  that  the  amount  of  such  bonds 
which  may  be  issued  in  any  one  year  in  excess  of  the  limitations 
herein  contained  shall  not  exceed  one-tenth  of  one  per  centum  of 
the  assessed  valuation  of  the  real  estate  of  such  city  subject  to 
taxation.  Nor  shall  this  section  lie  construed  to  prevent  the  issue 
of  bonds  to  provide  for  the  supply  of  water.  All  certificates  of 
indebtedness  or  revenue  bonds  issued  in  anticipation  of  the  col- 
lection of  taxes,  which  are  not  retired  within  five  years  after 
their  date  of  issue,  and  bonds  issued  to  provide  for  the  supply 
of  water,  and  any  debt  hereafter  incurred  by  any  portion  or 
part  of  a  city,  if  there  shall  lie  any  such  debt,  shall  be  included 
in  ascertaining  the  power  of  the  city  to  become  otherwise  in- 
debted; except  that  debts  incurred  by  cities  of  the  first  class 
after  the  first  day  of  January,  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and 
four,  and  debts  incurred  by  any  city  of  the  second  class  after  the 
first  day  of  January,  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  eight,  and 
debts  incurred  by  any  city  of  the  third  class  after  the  first  day 
of  January,  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  ten,  to  provide  for  the 
supply  of  water,  shall  not  be  so  included ;  and  except  further 
that  any  debt  hereafter  incurred  by  the  city  of  New  York  for  a 
public  improvement  owned  or  to  be  owned  by  the  city,  which 
yields  to  the  city  current  net  revenue,  after  making  any  neces- 
sary allowance  for  repairs  and  maintenance  for  which  the  city  is 
liable,  in  excess  of  the  interest  on  such  debt  and  of  the  annual  in- 
stalments necessary  for  its  amortization  may  be  excluded  in  as- 
certaining the  power  of  such  city  to  become  otherwise  indebted, 
provided  that  a  sinking  fund  for  its  amortization  shall  have  been 
established  and  maintained  and  that  the  indebtedness  shall  not 
be  so  excluded  during  any  period  of  time  when  the  revenue  afore- 
said shall  not  be  sufficient  to  equal  such  interest  and  amortiza- 
tion instalments,  and  except  further  that  any  indebtedness  here- 
tofore incurred  by  the  city  of  New  York  for  any  rapid  transit  or 
dock  investment  may  be  so  excluded  proportionately  to  tin1  extent 
to  which  the  current  nel  revenue  received  by  such  city  therefrom 
shall  meet  the  interest  and  amortization  instalments  thereof,  pro- 
vided  that   any  increase   in   the  debt    incurring  power  of  the  city 


Article  XI  55  Doc.  No.  52 

of  New  York  which  shall  result  from  the  exclusion  of  debts  here- 
tofore incurred  shall  be  available  only  for  the  acquisition  or  con- 
struction of  properties  to  be  used  for  rapid  transit  or  dock  pur- 
poses. The  legislature  shall  prescribe  the  method  by  which  and 
the  terms  and  conditions  under  which  the  amount  of  any  debt  to 
be  so  excluded  shall  be  determined,  and  no  such  debt  shall  be  ex- 
eluded  except  in  accordance  with  the  determination  so  prescribed. 
The  legislature  may  in  its  discretion  confer  appropriate  jurisdic- 
tion on  the  appellate  division  of  the  supreme  court  in  the  first 
judicial  department  for  the  purpose  of  determining  the  amount  of 
any  debt  to  be  so  excluded.  No  indebtedness  of  a  city  valid  at 
the  time  of  its  inception  shall  thereafter  become  invalid  by  reason 
of  the  operation  of  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  section.  When- 
ever the  boundaries  of  any  city  are  the  same  as  those  of  a 
county,  or  when  any  city  shall  include  within  its  boundaries 
more  than  one  county,  the  power  of  any  county  wholly  included 
within  such  city  to  become  indebted  shall  cease,  but  the  debt  of 
the  county,  heretofore  existing,  shall  not,  for  the  purposes  of  this 
section,  be  reckoned  as  a  part  of  the  city  debt.  The  amount  here- 
after to  be  raised  by  tax  for  county  or  city  purposes,  in  any  county 
containing  a  city  of  over  one  hundred  thousand  inhabitants,  or  any 
such  city  of  this  state,  in  addition  to  providing  for  the  principal 
and  interest  of  existing  debt,  shall  not  in  the  aggregate  exceed  in 
any  one  year  two  per  centum  of  the  assessed  valuation  of  the  real 
and  personal  estate  of  such  county  or  city,  to  be  ascertained  as 
prescribed  in  this  section  in  respect  to  county  or  city  debt. 

Section  12.  The  legislature  shall  provide  for  the  method  and 
limitations  under  which  debts  may  be  contracted  by  the  cities, 
counties,  towns,  villages  and  other  civil  divisions  of  the  state  to 
the  end  that  such  debts  shall  be  payable  in  annual  instalments  the 
last  of  which  shall  fall  due  and  be  paid  within  fifty  years  after 
such  debt  shall  have  been  contracted  and  that  no  such  debt  shall 
lie  contracted  for  a  period  longer  than  the  probable  life  of  the 
work  or  object  for  which  the  debt  is  to  be  contracted. 

Section  13.  The  legislature  shall  provide  for  a  state  board  of 
charities,  which  shall  visit  and  inspect  all  institutions,  whether 
state,  county,  municipal,  incorporated  or  not  incorporated,  which 
are  of  a  charitable,  eleemosynary,  correctional  or  reformatory 
character,  excepting  only  such  institutions  as  are  hereby  made 
subject  to  the  visitation  and  inspection  of  either  of  the  commis- 
sions, hereinafter  mentioned,  but  including  nil  reformatories  excepJ 


Doc.   No.   52  56  Article  XI 

those  in  which  adult  males  convicted  of  felony  shall  be  confined  ; 
a  state  commission  in  lunacy  in  which  shall  remain  the  manage- 
ment and  fiscal  control  of  the  state  hospitals  for  the  insane  (not 
including  institutions  for  criminals  or  convicts)  except  in  so  far 
as  such  management  may  now  or  hereafter  be  delegated  by  the 
legislature  to  local  boards  of  managers,  and  which  shall  visit  and 
inspect  all  institutions,  either  public  or  private,  used  for  the  care 
and  treatment  of  the  insane  (not  including  institutions  for 
epileptics  or  idiots)  ;  a  state  commission  of  prisons  which  shall 
visit  and  inspect  all  institutions  used  for  the  detention  of  sane 
adults  charged  with  or  convicted  of  crime,  or  detained  as  witnesses 
or  debtors. 

Section  14.  The  members  of  such  board  and  of  such  commis- 
sions shall  be  appointed  by  the  governor,  by  and  with  the  advice 
and  consent  of  the  senate;  and  any  member  may  be  removed  from 
office  by  the  governor  for  cause,  an  opportunity  having  been  given 
him  to  be  heard  in  his  defense. 

Section  15.  Existing  laws  relating  to  institutions  referred  to  in 
the  foregoing  sections  and  to  their  supervision  and  inspection, 
in  so  far  as  such  laws  are  not  inconsistent  with  the  provisions  of 
this  constitution,  shall  remain  in  force  until  amended  or  repealed 
by  the  legislature.  The  visitation  and  inspection  herein  provided 
for,  shall  not  be  exclusive  of  other  visitation  and  inspection  now 
authorized  by  law. 

Section  10.  Nothing  in  this  constitution  contained  shall  pre- 
vent the  legislature  from  making  such  provision  for  the  education 
and  support  of  the  blind,  the  deaf  and  dumb,  and  juvenile  delin- 
quents, as  to  it  may  seem  proper;  or  prevent  any  county,  city, 
town  or  village  from  providing  for  the  care,  support,  maintenance 
and  secular  education,  of  inmates  of  orphan  asylums,  homes  In- 
dependent children  or  correctional  institutions,  whether  under 
public  or  private  control.  Payments  by  counties,  cities,  towns 
and  villages  to  charitable,  eleemosynary,  correctional  and  reforma- 
tory institutions,  wholly  or  partly  under  private  control,  for  care, 
support  and  maintenance,  may  be  authorized,  but  shall  not  be 
required  by  the  legislature.  No  such  payments  shall  bo  made  for 
any  inmate  of  such  institutions  who  is  not  received  and  retained 
therein  pursuant  to  rules  established  by  (lie  state  board  of  chari- 
ties. Such  rules  shall  be  subject  to  the  control  of  the  legislature 
bv  ijvne.ua  I   laws. 


Article  XI  57  Doc.  No.  52 

Section  17.  Commissioners  of  the  state  board  of  charities  and 
commissioners  of  the  state  commission  in  lunacy,  now  holding 
office,  shall  be  continued  in  office  for  the  term  for  which  they  were 
appointed,  respectively,  unless  the  legislature  shall  otherwise 
provide.  The  legislature  may  confer  upon  the  commissions  and 
upon  the  board  mentioned  in  the  foregoing  sections  any  additional 
powers  that  are  not  inconsistent  with  other  provisions  of  this 
constitution. 

ARTICLE  XII. 

Section  1.  The  legislature  shall  provide  for  the  maintenance 
and  support  of  a  system  of  free  common  schools,  wherein  all  the 
children  of  this  state  may  be  educated. 

Section  2.  The  corporation  created  in  the  year  one  thousand 
seven  hundred  and  eighty-four,  under  the  name  of  The  Regents 
of  the  University  of  the  State  of  Xew  York,  is  hereby  continued 
under  the  name  of  The  University  of  the  State  of  Xew  York. 
It  shall  be  governed  and  its  corporate  powers,  which  may  be 
increased,  modified  or  diminished  by  the  legislature,  shall  be 
exercised,  by  not  less  than  nine  regents. 

Section  3.  The  capital  of  the  common  school  fund,  the  capital 
of  the  literature  fund,  and  the  capital  of  the  United  States  deposit 
fund,  shall  be  respectively  preserved  inviolate.  The  revenue  of 
such  common  school  fund  shall  be  applied  to  the  support  of 
common  schools ;  the  revenue  of  such  literature  fund  shall  be 
applied  to  the  support  of  academies ;  and  the  sum  of  twenty-five 
thousand  dollars  of  the  revenues  of  the  United  States  deposit  fund 
shall  each  year  be  appropriated  to  and  made  part  of  the  capital 
of  such  common  school  fund. 

Section  4.  Neither  the  state  nor  any  subdivision  thereof,  shall 
use  its  property  or  credit  or  any  public  money,  or  authorize  or 
permit  either  to  be  used,  directly  or  indirectly,  in  aid  or  mainte- 
nance, other  than  for  examination  or  inspection,  of  any  school  or 
institution  of  learning  wholly  or  in  part  under  the  control  or  direc- 
tion of  any  religious  denomination,  or  in  which  any  denomina- 
tional tenet  or  doctrine  is  taught. 

ARTICLE  XIII. 
Section  1.   Sheriffs,  clerks  of  counties,  district  attorneys,  and 
registers    in   counties   having   registers,    shall   be   chosen   by   the 
electors  of  the  respective  comities,  once  in  every  three  years  and 


Doc.  No.   52  58  Article  XIII 

as  often  as  vacancies  shall  happen,  except  in  the  counties  of  Xew 
York  and  Kings,  and  in  counties  whose  boundaries  are  the  same 
as  those  of  a  city,  where  such  officers  shall  be  chosen  by  the  electors 
once  in  every  two  or  four  years  as  the  legislature  shall  direct. 
Sheriffs  shall  hold  no  other  office,  and  be  ineligible  for  the  next 
term  after  the  termination  of  their  offices.  They  may  be  required 
by  law  to  renew  their  security,  from  time  to  time:  and  in  default 
of  giving  such  new  security,  their  offices  shall  be  deemed  vacant. 
But  the  county  shall  never  be  made  responsible  for  the  acts  of  the 
sheriff.  The  governor  may  remove  any  officer,  in  this  sectior 
mentioned,  within  the  term  for  which  he  shall  have  been  elected ; 
giving  to  such  officer  a  copy  of  the  charges  against  him,  and  an 
opportunity  of  being  heard  in  his  defense. 

Section  2.  All  county  officers,  whose  election  or  appointment 
is  not  provided  for  by  this  constitution,  shall  be  elected  by  the 
electors  of  the  respective  counties  or  appointed  by  the  boards  of 
supervisors,  or  other  county  authorities,  as  the  legislature  shall 
direct.  All  city,  town  and  village  officers  whose  election,  or  ap- 
pointment is  not  provided  for  by  this  constitution,  shall  be 
elected  by  the  electors  of  such  cities,  towns  and  villages,  or  of 
some  division  thereof,  or  appointed  by  such  authorities  thereof, 
as  shall  be  provided  by  law.  All  other  officers,  whose  election  or 
appointment  is  not  provided  for  by  this  constitution,  and  all 
officers,  whose  offices  may  hereafter  be  created  by  law,  shall  be 
elected  by  the  people,  or  appointed,  as  may  be  provided  by  law. 

Section  3.  When  the  duration  of  any  office  is  not  provided  by 
this  constitution,  it  may  lie  declared  by  law,  and  if  not  so  de- 
clared, such  office  shall  be  held  during  the  pleasure  of  the  au- 
thority making  the  appointment. 

Section  4.  The  time  of  electing  all  officers  named  in  this  article 
shall  be  prescribed  by  law. 

Section  5.  The  legislature  shall  provide  for  filling  vacancies  in 
office,  and  in  cast1  of  elective  officers,  no  person  appointed  to  till 
a  vacancy  shall  hold  his  office  by  virtue  of  such  appointment  longer 
than  the  commencement  of  the  political  year  next  succeeding  the 
first  annual  election  after  the  happening  of  (he  vacancy. 

Seel  ion  6.  Provision  shall  be  made  by  law  for  tin1  removal  for 
misconduct  or  malversation  in  office  of  all  officers,  except  judicial, 


Article   XIII  59  Doc.   No.   52 

whose  powers  and  duties  are  not  local  or  legislative  and  who  shall 
be  elected  at  general  elections,  and  also  for  filling  vacancies 
created  by  such  removal. 

Section  7.  The  legislature  may  declare  the  cases  in  which  any 
office  shall  be  deemed  vacant  when  no  provision  is  made  for  thai 
purpose  in  this  constitution. 

Section  8.  No  officer  whose  salary  is  iixed  by  this  constitution 
shall  receive  any  additional  compensation.  Each  of  the  other 
state  officers  named  in  this  constitution  shall,  during  his  con- 
tinuance in  office,  receive  a  compensation,  to  be  fixed  by  law,  which 
shall  not  be  increased  or  diminished  during  the  term  for  which 
he  shall  have  been  elected  or  appointed;  nor  shall  he  receive  to 
his  use  any  fees  or  perquisites  of  office  or  other  compensation. 

Section  9.  All  offices  for  the  weighing,  gauging,  measuring, 
culling  or  inspecting  any  merchandise,  produce,  manufacture)  or 
commodity  whatever,  are  hereby  abolished;  and  no  such  office 
shall  hereafter  be  created  by  law :  but  nothing  in  this  section  con- 
tained shall  abrogate  any  office  created  for  the  purpose  of  pro- 
tecting the  public  health  or  the  interests  of  the  state  in  its  prop- 
erty, revenue,  tolls  or  purchases,  or  of  supplying  the  people  with 
correct  standards  of  weights  and  measures,  or  shall]  prevent  the 
creation  of  any  office  for  such  purposes  hereafter. 

Section  10.  Appointments  and  promotions  in  the  civil  service  of 
the  state,  and  of  all  the  civil  divisions  thereof,  including  cities 
and  villages,  shall  be  made  according  to  merit  and  fitness  to  be 
ascertained,  so  far  as  practical)!!1,  by  examinations,  which,  so  far 
as  practicable,  shall  be  competitive:  provided  however,  that  honor- 
ably discharged  soldiers  and  sailors  from  the  army  and  navy  of 
the  United  States  in  the  late  civil  war,  who  are  citizens  and  resi- 
dents of  this  state,  shall  be  entitled  to  preference  in  appointment 
and  promotion,  without  regard  to  their  standing  on  any  list  from 
which  such  appointment  or  promotion  may  be  made.  Laws 
shall  be  made  to  provide  for  the  enforcement  of  this  section. 

AETICLE  XIV. 

Section  1.  All  able-bodied  male  citizens  between  the  ages  of 
eighteen  and  forty-five  years,  who  are  residents  of  the  state,  shall 
constitute  the  militia,  subject  however  to  such  exemptions  as  are 
now,  or  may  be  hereafter  created  by  the  laws  of  the  United  States, 
or  by  the  legislature  of  this  state. 


Doc.   No.   52  60  Article  XIV 

Section  2.  The  legislature  may  provide  for  the  enlistment  into 
the  active  force  of  such  other  persons  as  may  make  application  to 
be  so  enlisted. 

Section  3.  The  militia  shall  be  organized  and  divided  into  such 
land  and  naval,  and  active  and  reserve  forces,  as  the  legislature 
may  deem  proper,  provided  however  that  there  shall  be  maintained 
at  all  times  a  force  of  not  less  than  ten  thousand  enlisted  men, 
fully  uniformed,  armed,  equipped,  disciplined  and  ready  for 
active  service.  And  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  legislature  at  each 
session  to  make  sufficient  appropriations  for  the  maintenance 
thereof. 

Section  4.  The  governor  shall  appoint  his  aides-de-camp  and 
military  secretary  and  the  adjutant-general  of  the  state,  .'ill  of 
whom  shall  hold  office  during  his  pleasure,  their  commissions  to 
expire  with  the  term  for  which  the  governor  shall  have  been 
elected;  he  shall  also  nominate,  and  with  the  consent  of  the  senate 
appoint,  all  major  generals.  The  legislature  may  prescribe  the 
number  and  qualifications  of  major  generals  and  aides-de-camp. 

Section  5.  All  other  commissioned  and  non-commissioned  offi- 
cers shall  be  chosen  or  appointed  in  such  manner  and  shall  have 
such  qualifications  as  the  legislature  may  deem  most  conducive  to 
the  improvement  of  the  militia,  provided,  however,  that  no  law 
shall  be  passed  changing  the  existing  mode  of  election  and  appoint- 
ment unless  two-thirds  of  the  members  present  in  each  house 
shall  concur  therein. 

Section  0.  The  commissioned  officers  shall  be  commissioned  by 
the  governor  as  commander-in-chief.  No  commissioned  officer 
shall  be  removed  from  office  during  the  term  for  which  he  shall 
have  been  appointed  or  elected,  unless  by  the  senate  on  the  recom- 
mendation of  the  governor,  stating  the  grounds  on  which  such 
removal  is  recommended,  or  by  the  sentence  of  a  court  martial, 
or  upon  the  findings  of  an  examining  board  organized  pursuant  to 
law,  or  for  absence  without  leave  for  a  period  of  three  months 
or  more. 

ARTICLE  XV. 

Section  1.   Tt  shall  bo  the  duty  of  flu1  legislature  by  general  laws 

to  provide  for  the  organization  of  new  cities   in  such  manner  as 

shall  secure  to  them  the  exercise  of  the  powers  granted  to  cities 

in  this  article.     Except  as  to  cities  having  more  than  one  bun- 


Article  XV  61  Doc.   No.  52 

dred  thousand  population,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  legislature 
to  restrict  the  powers  of  taxation  and  assessment  so  as  to  prevent 
abuses  in  taxation  and  assessments  by  any  city  or  incorporated 
village. 

Section  2.  The  legislature  may  regulate  and  fix  the  wages 
and,  except  as  otherwise  provided  in  this  article,  the  salaries  and 
may  also  regulate  and  fix  the  hours  of  work  or  labor,  and  make 
provision  for  the  protection,  welfare  and  safety  of  persons  em- 
ployed by  the  state  or  by  any  county,  city,  town,  village  or  other 
civil  division  of  the  state,  or  by  any  contractor  or  subcontractor 
performing  work,  labor  or  services  for  the  state,  or  for  any  county, 
city,  town,  village  or  other  civil  division  thereof. 

Section  3.  Every  city  shall  have  exclusive  power  to  manage,  reg- 
ulate and  control  its  property,  affairs  and  municipal  government 
subject  to  the  provisions  of  this  constitution  and  subject  further  to 
the  provisions  of  the  general  laws  of  the  state,  of  laws  applying  to 
all  the  cities  of  the  state  without  classification  or  distinction,  and 
of  laws  applying  to  a  county  not  wholly  included  within  a  city 
establishing  or  affecting  the  relation  between  such  a  county  and 
a  city  therein. 

Such  power  shall  be  deemed  to  include  among  others: 

(a)  The  power  to  organize  and  manage  all  departments, 
bureaus,  or  other  divisions  of  its  municipal  government  and  to 
regulate  the  powers,  duties,  qualifications,  mode  of  selection,  num- 
ber, terms  of  office,  compensation  and  method  of  removal  of  all  city 
officers  and  employees,  including  all  police  and  health  officers  and 
employees  paid  by  the  city,  and  of  all  non-judicial  officers  and  em- 
ployees attached  to  courts  not  of  record,  and  to  regulate  the  com- 
pensation of  all  officers  not  chosen  by  the  electors  and  of  all  em- 
ployees of  counties  situated  wholly  within  a  city  except  assistants 
and  employees  of  district  attorneys  and  except  officers  and  em- 
ployees of  courts  of  record. 

(b)  The  power,  as  hereinafter  provided,  to  revise  or  enact 
amendments  to  its  charter  in  relation  to  its  property,  affairs  or 
municipal  government  and  to  enact  amendments  to  any  local  or 
special  law  in  relation  thereto.  A  city  may  adopt  a  revised  charter 
or  enact  amendments  to  its  charter  or  any  existing  special  or  local 
law  in  relation  to  any  matter  of  state  concern  the  management, 
regulation  and  control  of  which  shall  have  been  delegated  to  the 
city  by  law,  until  and  unless  the  legislature,  pursuant  to  the  pro- 


Doc.  No.  52  62  Article  X\ 

visions  of  section  four  of  this  article  shall  enact  a  law  inconsistent 
therewith.  The  term  "  charter  "  is  declared  for  the  purposes 
of  this  article  to  include  any  general  city  law  enacted  for  the  cities 
of  one  class  in  so  far  as  it  applies  to  such  city. 

The  legislative  body  of  the  city  may  enact  such  amendments, 
subject  to  the  approval  of  the  mayor  and  of  the  hoard  of  estimate 
and  apportionment  of  the  city  if  any  there  he;  provided,  however, 
that  in  a  city  in  which  any  of  the  members  of  the  board  of  esti- 
mate and  apportionment  are  not  elected  or  in  which  no  such  body 
exists  no  such  amendment  shall  be  enacted  without  the  assent  of 
two-thirds  of  all  members  elected  to  such  legislative  body.  Every 
such  enactment  shall  embrace  only  one  subject  and  shall  expressly 
declare  that  it  is  such  an  amendment.  Every  amendment  which 
changes  the  framework  of  the  government  of  the  city  or  modifies 
restrictions  as  to  issuing  bonds  or  contracting  debts  shall  be  sub- 
mitted to  the  legislature  in  the  year  one  thousand  nine  hundred 
and  sixteen  on  or  before  the  fifteenth  day  of  March  and  in  any 
year  thereafter  during  the  first  week  of  its  next  regular  session, 
and  shall  take  effect  as  law  sixty  days  after  such  submission  unless 
in  the  meantime  the  legislature  shall  disapprove  the  same  by  joint 
resolution.  Every  other  such  amendment  shall  take  effect  upon  its 
enactment  as  above  provided  without  such  submission  to  the 
legislature. 

The  legislature  by  general  law  shall  provide  for  a  public  notice 
and  opportunity  for  a  public  hearing  by  the  legislative  body  of 
the  city  concerning  any  such  amendment  before  final  action 
thereon  by  it. 

At  the  general  election  in  the  year  one  thousand  nine  hundred 
and  seventeen,  and  unless  its  charter  after  one  revision  thereof  shall 
otherwise  provide,  in  every  eighth  year  thereafter  either  at  the  gen- 
eral or  at  a  special  election,  every  city  .'hall  submit  to  the  electors 
thereof,  the  question  *k  Shall  there  be  a  commission  1<»  revise  the 
charter  of  the  city?"  and  may  at  the  same  time  choose  seven  com- 
missioners to  revise  the  city  charter  in  case  the  question  be 
answered  in  the  affirmative,  provided,  however,  that  in  the  city  of 
New  York  the  number  of  such  commissioners  shall  be  sixteen, 
nine  of  whom  shall  be  chosen  by  the  electors  of  the  entire  city,  two 
by  the  electors  of  the  borough  of  Manhattan,  two  by  the  electors  of 
the  borough  of  Brooklyn,  and  one  each  by  the  electors  of  the 
boroughs  of  The  Bronx,  Queens  and  Richmond  respectively.  Such 
revision  when  completed  shall  be  filed  in  the  office  of  the  city 


Article  XV  03  Doc.  No.  52 

clerk,  and  not  loss  than  six  weeks  after  such  filing  shall  be  sub- 
mitted to  the  electors  of  the  city  at  the  next  ensuing  general  elec- 
tion or  at  a  special  election  to  be  called  for  that  purpose.  If  such 
revision  be  approved  by  the  affirmative  vote  of  the  majority  of  the 
electors  voting  thereon  such  revision  shall  be  submitted  to  the  legis- 
lature during  the  first  week  of  its  session  in  January  of  the  year 
following  the  approval  thereof,  and  if  not  disapproved  by  the  legis- 
lature by  joint  resolution  prior  to  the  first  day  of  July  thereafter 
shall  thereupon  take  effect  as. law  except  as  therein  otherwise  speci- 
fied. The  legislature  shall  by  general  law  provide  for  carrying 
into  effect  the  provisions  of  this  paragraph. 

Every  charter  revision  and  every  amendment  of  any  provision 
of  law,  enacted  pursuant  to  this  section,  shall  be  deposited  with 
the  secretary  of  state  and  published  as  the  legislature  may  direct. 

Section  4.  All  cities  are  classified  according  to  the  latest 
federal  or  state  census  or  enumeration,  as  from  time  to  time  made, 
as  follows:  The  first  class  includes  all  cities  having  a  population 
of  one  hundred  and  seventy-five  thousand  or  more;  the  second 
class,  nil  cities  having  a  population  of  fifty  thousand  and  less 
than  one  hundred  and  seventy-five  thousand;  the  third  class,  all 
other  cities. 

The  legislature  may  delegate  to  cities  for  exercise  within  their 
respective  local  jurisdictions  such  of  its  powers  of  legislation  as 
to  matters  of  state  concern  as  it  may  from  time  to  time  deem 
expedient. 

The  legislature  shall  pass  no  law  relating  to  the  property, 
affairs  or  municipal  government  of  any  city  excepting  such  as 
is  applicable  to  all  the  cities  of  the  state  without  classification  or 
distinction. 

The  provisions  of  this  article  shall  not  be  deemed  to  restrict 
the  powers  of  the  legislature  to  pass  laws  regulating  matters  of 
state  concern  as  distinguished  from  matters  relating  to  the  prop- 
erty, affairs  or  municipal  government  of  cities. 

Laws  affecting  cities  in  relation  to  boundaries,  water  supply, 
sewerage  and  public  improvements,  involving  the  use  of  territory 
outside  the  boundaries  of  cities,  and  in  relation  to  the  govern- 
ment of  cities  in  matters  of  state  concern  and  applying  to  less 
than  all  the  cities  of  the  state  without  classification  or  distinction 
are  defined  for  the  purposes  of  this  article  as  special  city  laws. 
Special  city  laws  shall  not  be  passed  except  in  conformity  with 
the  provisions  of  this  section.  After  any  bill  for  a  special  city  law 
has  been  passed  by  both  branches  of  the  legislature,  the  house  in 


Doc.   No.  52  64  Article  XV 

which  it  originated  shall  immediately  transmit  a  certified  copy 
thereof  to  the  mayor  of  each  city  to  which  it  relates,  and  within 
fifteen  days  thereafter  the  mayor  shall  return  such  hill  to  the 
clerk  of  the  house  from  which  it  was  sent,  who,  if  the  session 
of  the  legislature  at  which  such  hill  was  passed  has  ter- 
minated, shall  immediately  transmit  the  same  to  the  gov- 
ernor with  the  mayor's  certificate  thereon,  stating  whether  the 
city  has  or  has  not  accepted  the  same.  In  every  city  of  the  first 
class,  the  mayor,  and  in  every  other  city,  the  mayor  and  the 
legislative  "body  thereof  concurrently,  shall  act  for  such  city  as  to 
such  bill;  hut  the  legislature  may  provide  for  the  concurrence  of 
the  legislative  hody  in  cities  of  the  first  class.  The  legislature 
shall  provide  for  a  public  notice  and  opportunity  for  a  public 
hearing  concerning  any  such  bill  in  every  city  to  which  it  relates, 
before  action  thereon.  Such  a  bill,  if  it  relates  to  more  than  one 
city,  shall  be  transmitted  to  the  mayor  of  each  city  to  which  it 
relates,  and  shall  not  be  deemed  accepted  unless  accepted  as 
herein  provided,  by  every  such  city.  Whenever  any  such  bill  is 
accepted  as  herein  provided,  it  shall  be  subject  as  are  other  bills, 
to  the  action  of  the  governor.  Whenever,  during  the  session  at 
which  it  was  passed  any  such  bill  is  returned  without  the  accept- 
ance of  the  city  or  cities  to  which  it  relates,  or  within  such  fifteen 
days  is  not  returned,  it  may  nevertheless  again  be  passed  by  both 
branches  of  the  legislature,  and  it  shall  then  be  subject  as  are 
other  bills,  to  the  action  of  the  governor.  In  every  special  city 
law  which  has  been  accepted  by  the  city  or  cities  to  which  it 
relates,  the  title  shall  be  followed  by  the  words  "  accepted  by  the 
city"  or  "cities"  as  the  case  may  be;  in  every  such  law  which 
is  passed  without  such  acceptance,  by  the  words  "  passed  without 
the  acceptance  of  the  city  "  or  "  cities  "  as  the  case  may  be. 

Section  5.  All  elections  of  city  officers,  including  supervisors 
and  judicial  officers  of  inferior  local  courts,  elected  in  any  city 
or  part  of  a  city,  and  of  county  officers  elected  in  the  counties  of 
New  York,  Kings,  Queens,  Richmond  and  Bronx,  and  in  all 
counties  whose  boundaries  are  the  same  as  those  of  a  city,  except 
to  fill  vacancies,  shall  be  held  on  the  Tuesday  succeeding  the  first 
Monday  in  November  in  an  odd-numbered  year,  and  the  term  of 
every  such  officer  shall  expire  at  the  end  of  an  odd-numbered 
year.  The  terms  of  office  of  all  such  officers  elected  before  the 
first  day  of  January,  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  seventeen, 
whose  successors  have  not  then  been  elected,  which  under  existing 


Article  XV  65  Doc.  No.  52 

laws  would  expire  with  an  even-numbered  year,  or  in  an  odd- 
numbered  year  and  before  the  end  thereof,  are  extended  to  and  in- 
cluding the  last  day  of  December  next  following  the  time  when 
such  terms  would  otherwise  expire ;  the  terms  of  office  of  all  such 
officers,  which  under  existing  laws  would  expire  in  an  even-num- 
bered year,  and  before  the  end  thereof,  are  abridged  so  as  to  ex- 
pire at  the  end  of  the  preceding  year.  This  section  shall  not 
apply  to  elections  of  any  judicial  officers,  except  judges  and  jus- 
tices of  inferior  local  courts. 


ARTICLE  XVI. 

Section  1.  Members  of  the  legislature,  and  all  officers,  ex- 
ecutive and  judicial,  except  such  inferior  officers  as  shall  be  by 
law  exempted  shall,  before  they  enter  on  the  duties  of  their  re- 
spective offices,  take  and  subscribe  the  following  oath  or  affirma- 
tion: "I  do  solemnly  swear  (or  affirm)  that  I  will  support  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States,  and  the  Constitution  of  the 
State  of  Xew  York,  and  that  I  will  faithfully  discharge  the  duties 

of  the  office  of ,  according  to  the  best  of  my  ability  "  and 

all  such  officers  who  shall  have  been  chosen  at  any  election  shall, 
before  they  enter  on  the  duties  of  their  respective  offices,  take 
and  subscribe  the  oath  or  affirmation  above  prescribed,  together 
with  the  following  addition  thereto,  as  part  thereof : 

"And  I  do  further  solemnly  swear  (or  affirm)  that  I  have  not 
directly  or  indirectly  paid,  offered  or  promised  to  pay,  contributed, 
or  offered  or  promised  to  contribute  any  money  or  other  valuable 
thing  as  a  consideration  or  reward  for  the  giving  or  withholding  a 
vote  at  the  election  at  which  I  was  elected  to  said  office,  and 
have  not  made  any  promise  to  influence  the  giving  or  withholding 
any  such  vote  "  and  no  other  oath,  declaration  or  test  shall  be 
required  as  a  qualification  for  any  office  or  public  trust. 

Section  2.  Any  person  holding  office  under  the  laws  of  this 
state,  who,  except  in  payment  of  his  legal  salary,  fees  or  per- 
quisites, shall  receive  or  consent  to  receive,  directly  or  indirectly, 
any  thing  of  value  or  of  personal  advantage,  or  the  promise  thereof, 
for  performing  or  omitting  to  perform  any  official  act,  or  with  the 
express  or  implied  understanding  that  his  official  action  or  omis- 
sion to  act  is  to  be  in  any  degree  influenced  thereby,  shall  be 
deemed  guilty  of  a  felony.  This  section  shall  not  affect  the  valid- 
ity of  any  existing  statute  in  relation  to  the  offense  of  bribery. 


Doc.  Xo.   52  GQ  Article  XVI 

Section  3.  Any  person  who  shall  offer  or  promise  a  bribe  to  an 
officer,  if  it  shall  be  received,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  felony 
and  liable  to  punishment,  except  as  herein  provided.  Xo  person 
offering  a  bribe  shall,  upon  any  prosecution  of  the  officer  for  receiv- 
ing such  bribe,  be  privileged  from  testifying  in  relation  thereto, 
and  he  shall  not  be  liable  to  civil  or  criminal  prosecution  therefor, 
if  he  shall  testify  to  the  giving  or  offering  of  such  bribe.  Any 
person  who  shall  offer  or  promise  a  bribe,  if  it  be  rejected  by  the 
officer  to  whom  it  was  tendered,  shall  be  guilty  of  an  attempt  to 
bribe,  which  is  hereby  declared  to  be  a  felony. 

Section  4.  Any  person  charged  with  receiving  a  bribe,  or  with 
offering  or  promising  a  bribe,  shall  be  permitted  to  testify  in  his 
own  behalf  in  any  civil  or  criminal  prosecution  therefor. 

Section  5.  Xo  public  officer,  or  person  elected  or  appointed  to 
a  public  office,  under  the  laws  of  this  state,  shall  directly  or  indi- 
rectly ask,  demand,  accept,  receive  or  consent  to  receive  for  his 
own  use  or  benefit,  or  for  the  use  or  benefit  of  another,  any  free 
pass,  free  transportation,  franking  privilege  or  discrimination  in 
passenger,  telegraph  or  telephone  rates,  from  any  person  or  cor- 
poration, or  make  use  of  the  same  himself  or  in  conjunction  with 
another.  A  person  who  violates  any  provision  of  this  section, 
shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and  shall  forfeit  his 
office  at  the  suit  of  the  attorney-general.  Any  corporation,  or 
officer  or  agent  thereof,  who  shall  offer  or  promise  to  a  public 
officer,  or  person  elected  or  appointed  to  a  public  office,  any  such 
free  pass,  free  transportation,  franking  privilege  or  discrimina- 
tion, shall  also  be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor  and  liable  to 
punishment  except  as  herein  provided.  Xo  person,  or  officer  or 
agent  of  a  corporation  giving  any  such  free  pass,  free  transporta- 
tion, franking  privilege  or  discrimination  hereby  prohibited,  shall 
be  privileged  from  testifying  in  relation  thereto,  and  he  shall  not 
be  liable  to  civil  or  criminal  prosecution  therefor  if  he  shall  testify 
to  the  giving  of  the  same. 

Section  6.  Any  district  attorney  who  shall  fail  faithfully  to 
prosecute  a  person  charged  with  the  violation  in  his  county  <tt 
any  provision  of  this  article  which  may  come  to  his  knowledge, 
shall  be  removed  from  office  by  the  governor,  after  due  notice  and 
an  opportunity  of  being  heard  in  his  defense.  The  expenses 
which  shall  be  incurred  by  any  comity,  in  investigating  and  prose- 
cuting any  charge  of  bribery  or  attempting  to  bribe  any  person 


Article  XVI  67  Doc.  No.   52 

holding  office  under  the  laws  of  this  state,  within  such  county,  or 
of  receiving  bribes  by  any  such  person  in  said  county,  shall  be  a 
charge  against  the  state,  and  their  payment  by  the  state  shall  be 
provided  for  by  law. 

ARTICLE  XVII. 

Section  1.  Any  amendment  or  amendments  to  this  constitu- 
tion may  be  proposed  in  the  senate  and  assembly;  and  if  the 
same  shall  be  agreed  to  by  a  majority  of  the  members  elected 
to  each  of  the  two  houses,  after  consideration  in  joint  session  as 
hereinafter  provided  and  after  the  same  shall  have  been  printed 
and  upon  the  desks  of  the  members  in  its  final  form  for  at  least 
five  calendar  legislative  days  prior  to  agreement  thereon,  such 
proposed  amendment  or  amendments  shall  be  entered  on  their 
journals,  and  the  yeas  and  nays  taken  thereon,  and  referred  to 
the  legislature  to  be  chosen  at  the  next  general  election  of  senators, 
and  shall  be  published  for  three  months  previous  to  the  time  of 
making  such  choice.  On  the  first  Tuesday  following  the  adoption 
by  either  house  of  the  legislature  of  any  proposed  amendment  to 
this  constitution,  the  two  houses  shall  convene  in  joint  session  for 
Jthe  consideration  thereof  and  thereafter  the  proposal  shall  be  con- 
sidered and  acted  upon  by  the  houses  separately.  If  in  the  legis- 
lature so  next  chosen,  as  aforesaid,  such  proposed  amendment  or 
amendments  shall  be  agreed  to  by  a  majority  of  all  the  members 
elected  to  each  house,  and  all  the  requirements  for  the  original  pas- 
sage thereof  shall  be  observed,  then  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the 
legislature  to  submit  such  proposed  amendment  or  amendments  to 
the  people  for  approval  at  the  general  election  in  such  manner 
as  the  legislature  shall  prescribe;  and  if  the  people  shall 
approve  and  ratify  such  amendment  or  amendments  by  a  majority 
of  the  electors  voting  thereon,  such  amendment  or  amendments 
shall  become  a  part  of  this  constitution  from  and  after  the  first  day 
of  January  next  after  such  approval. 

Section  2.  The  question  "  Shall  there  be  a  convention  to  revise 
and  amend  the  constitution  ?  "  shall  be  submitted  to  the  elec- 
tors of  the  state  at  each  general  election  next  ensuing  the  lapse  of 
twenty  successive  years  since  the  last  previous  submission  thereof, 
and  shall  be  submitted  at  such  other  general  elections  as  the  legis- 
lature may  by  law  provide.  In  case  a  majority  of  the  electors 
voting  thereon  shall  decide  in  favor  of  a  convention  for  such  pur- 
pose, the  electors  of  every  senate  district  of  the  state,  as  then 


Doc.  No.   52  68  Akticle  XVII 

organized,  shall  elect  three  delegates  at  the  next  ensuing  general 
election  at  which  members  of  the  assembly  shall  be  chosen,  and 
the  electors  of  the  state  voting  at  the  same  election  shall 
elect  fifteen  delegates-at-large.  The  delegates  so  elected  shall 
convene  at  the  capitol  on  the  first  Tuesday  following  the 
completion  of  the  canvass  of  the  votes  cast  for  delegates-at-large 
at  such  election  and  shall  continue  their  session  until  the  business 
of  such  convention  shall  have  been  completed.  Every  delegate 
shall  receive  for  his  services  the  same  compensation  and  the  same 
reimbursement  for  railroad  fare  as  shall  then  be  annually  payable 
to  the  members  of  the  assembly.  A  majority  of  the  convention 
shall  constitute  a  quorum  for  the  transaction  of  business,  and  no 
amendment  to  this  constitution  shall  be  submitted  for  approval  to 
the  electors  as  hereinafter  provided,  unless  by  the  assent  of  a 
majority  of  all  the  delegates  elected  to  the  convention,  the  yeas  and 
nays  being  entered  on  the  journal  to  be  kept.  The  convention  shall 
have  the  power  to  appoint  such  officers,  employees  and  assistants  as 
it  may  deem  necessary,  and  fix  their  compensation  and  to  provide 
for  the  printing  of  its  documents,  journal  and  proceedings.  The 
convention  shall  determine  the  rules  of  its  own  proceedings,  choose 
its  own  officers,  and  be  the  judge  of  the  election,  returns  and  quali- 
fication of  its  members.  In  case  of  a  vacancy,  by  death,  resignation 
or  other  cause,  of  any  district  delegate  elected  to  the  convention, 
such  vacancy  shall  be  filled  by  a  vote  of  the  remaining  delegates  rep- 
resenting the  district' in  which  such  vacancy  occurs.  If  such  va- 
cancy occurs  in  the  office  of  a  delegate-at-large,  such  vacancy  shall 
be  filled  by  a  vote  of  the  remaining  delegates-at-large.  Any  pro- 
posed constitution  or  constitutional  amendment  which  shall  have 
been  adopted  by  such  convention,  shall  be  submitted  to  a  vote  of 
the  electors  of  the  state  in  the  manner  provided  by  such  conven- 
tion, at  a  general  election  which  shall  be  held  not  less  than  ninety 
days  after  the  adjournment  of  such  convention.  Upon  the  ap- 
proval of  such  constitution  or  constitutional  amendments,  in  the 
manner  provided  in  the  last  preceding  section,  such  constitution 
or  constitutional  amendments,  shall  go  into  effect  on  the  first  day 
of  January  next  after  such  approval. 

Section  3.  The  validity  of  an  election  upon  any  amendment  or 
proposed  constitution  or  the  question  "  Shall  there  be  a  convention 
to  revise  and  amend  the  constitution?'"  or  upon  any  other 
question  submitted  to  the  electors  of  the  slate  under  this  constitu- 
tion,  and  the  determination  whether  the  proposed   amendment, 


Article  XVII  69  Doc.  No.  52 

constitution  or  question  has  received  the  number  of  votes  requisite 
for  the  adoption  of  such  amendment  or  constitution  or  the  de- 
cision of  such  question,  may  he  contested  in  the  supreme  court  by 
any  elector  in  an  action  in  equity  brought  within  three  months 
after  such  election  against  the  secretary  of  state,  and  the  judg- 
ment rendered  shall  be  reviewable  by  the  court  of  appeals. 

Section  4.  Any  amendment  proposed  by  a  constitutional  conven- 
tion relating  to  the  same  subject  as  an  amendment  proposed  by 
the  legislature,  coincidently  submitted  to  the  people  for  approval, 
shall,  if  approved,  be  deemed  to  supersede  the  amendment  so  pro- 
posed by  the  legislature ;  provided,  however,  that,  if  at  the  general 
election  held  in  the  year  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  fifteen,  a 
majority  of  the  electors  voting  thereon  shall  have  approved  and 
ratified  the  amendment  to  section  one  of  article  two  of  the  consti- 
tution then  in  force,  heretofore  proposed  by  the  legislature,  section 
one  of  article  two  of  this  constitution  shall  be  deemed  thereby 
amended  so  as  to  embody  therein  the  new  matter  contained  in  such 
proposed  amendment  so  approved.  If,  at  such  general  election,  a 
majority  of  the  electors  voting  thereon  shall  have  approved  and 
ratified  chapter  five  hundred  and  seventy  of  the  laws  of  one  thou- 
sand nine  hundred  and  fifteen  heretofore  submitted  to  the  people 
pursuant  to  section  four  of  article  seven  of  the  constitution  then  in 
force,  the  same  shall  take  effect  notwithstanding  any  amendment 
of  such  constitution,  except  that,  irrespective  of  the  terms  of  such 
chapter,  the  debt  so  authorized  shall  be  paid  in  equal  annual  in- 
stalments in  conformity  with  section  four  of  article  nine  of  this 
constitution. 

AKTICLE  XVIII. 

Section  1.  This  constitution  shall  be  in  force  from  and  includ- 
ing the  first  day  of  January,  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  six- 
teen, except  as  herein  otherwise  provided. 

Done  in  Convention  at  the  Capitol  in  the  city  of  Albany,  the 

day  of  September,  in  the  year  one  thousand 

nine  hundred  and  fifteen,  and  of  the  Independence 

of  the  United  States  of  America  the  one  hundred  and 

fortieth. 

In  witness  whereof,  we  have  hereunto  subscribed  our 
names. 

President  and  Delegate  at  Large. 
Secretary. 


SCHEDULE    A 

Source  of  Articles  of  Constitution  of  1915 


Constitution  of  1915 


Civil  rights 

Elective  franchise 

Legislature 

Executive 

Appropriations  and  the  budget 

State  departments 

Conservation 

Judiciary 

State  debts 

Taxation 

Corporations;   municipal  debts;   state  boards   and 

commissions 

Education 

Officers  generally 

Military 

Cities  and  Villages 

Official  corruption 

Constitutional  amendments 

Time  of  taking  effect 


Constitution 
of  1894 


1 
2 

3;  10  pt.;  new  pt. 
4 
new 

5  pt.;  new  pt. 
7  pt.;  new  pt. 

6  pt.;  new  pt. 
7 

new 

8;  new  pt. 

9 

10;  5  pt. 
11 

12;  new  pt. 
13 

14;  new  pt. 
15 


SCHEDULE    B 

Disposition  of  Sections  of  Constitution  of  1804 


Constitution  of  1894 

Constitution  of  1915 

Article 

Section 

Article 

Section 

Proposal 

1 

1 

1 

2 

2 

3 

3 

4 

4 

5 

5 

6 

6 

Amended.     Proposal  870 
Amended.     Proposal  870 

7  (asam'dl913)... 
8 

7 

8 

9 

9   .  . 

10 

10  .  . 

11 ; 

11    . 

12 

12   .  . 

13 

13 

14 

14 

Doc.  No.  52 


72 


SCHEDULE  B  {Continued) 
Disposition  of  Sections  of  Constitution  of  1894 


Constitution  of  1894 

Constitution  of  1915 

Article 

Section 

Article 

Section 

Proposal 

1 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19  (added  1913) .... 

15 

Amended.     Proposal  799 

16 

17 

18 

19 

Amended.  Proposal  865 
Amended.     Proposal  865 

2 

1 

2 

Z.'.'... ........... 

2 
2 
2 

2 
2 
2 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

4 

5 

6 

Amended.     Proposal  844 

3 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 

1 

2 

Amended.  Proposal  869 
Amended.  Proposal  869 
Amended.  Proposal  869 
Amended.  Proposal  869 
Amended.     Proposal  835 

3 

4 

5 

8 

7 

8 

3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 

11 

6 

Amended.     Proposal  869 

9 

10 

11 

12 

9 

12 

13 

14 

13.  .  . 

14.  .  . 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

15.  .  . 

Am'd.     Pro'ls  746  and  861 

16.  .  . 

17.  .  . 

18  (as  am'd  1901) . . . 
19 

20 

Amended.     Proposal  861 

20.  .  . 

21 

21.  . 

22 

Amended.     Proposal  S09 

22.  .  . 

23 

23 

Repealed.     Proposal  861 

24.  .  . 

3 

24 

25.  .  . 

Repealed.  Proposal  861 
Amended.  Proposal  853 
Amended.  Proposal  853 
Amended.     Proposal  800 

26  (as am'd  1899)... 

27  (as  am'd  1909)... 
28 

3 

3 
3 
3 

25 

26 

27 

29 

28.  .  . 

4 

1 

4 
4 
4 
4 
4 
4 
4 
4 
4 

1    . 

2 

2      . 

3 

3   .  . 

4 

4  .  . 

5.  . . 

6 

6... 

7 

7 

Amended.     Proposal  846 

8 

8 

9 

9 

73 


Doc.  No.  52 


SCHEDULE  B    {Continued) 
Disposition  of  Sections  of  Constitution  of  1894 


Constitution  of  1894 

Constitution  of  1915 

Article 

Section 

Article 

Section 

Proposal 

5 

1            

2 

Repealed.     Proposal  863 
Repealed.     Proposal  863 
Repealed.     Proposal  863 

3                 

4 

7  (new) 

5 

5 

Old.    Rep.    Prop.  857 

6 

Repealed.     Proposal  863 
Repealed.     Proposal  863 

7 

8 

13 
13 

9     

9   

10 

6 

1  (as  am'd  1905) . . . 

2  (as  am'd  1905) . . . 
3 

8 
8 
8 
8 

1    

2 

Amended.     Proposal  850 

4 

Amended.     Proposal  850 

4 

5 

Amended.     Proposal  850 

5 

Out.     Proposal  850 

6     .               

Out.     Proposal  850 

7  (as  am'd  1899) . . . 
8 

8 
8 
8 
8 
8 
8 
8 
8 
8 
8 
8 
8 
8 
8 
8 
8 
8 

9 

10 

9      

11 

Amended.     Proposal  850 

10 

12 

11 

13 

12  (as  am'd  1909) . . . 

13          

14           

15. 

Amended.     Proposal  850 

14  (as  am'd  1913)... 
15 

16  

Amended.     Proposal  850 

17 

16 

18   

17 

19   

Amended.     Proposal  850 

18 

22  

Amended.     Proposal  850 

19 

23   

Amended.     Proposal  850 

20 

24  

Amended.     Proposal  850 

21 

25   

Amended.     Proposal  850 

22 

26     .       

Amended.     Proposal  850 

23 

27         

Amended.     Proposal  850 

7 

1 

9 
9 
9 
9 
9 
9 
7 
9 
9 
9 
9 
9 

1     

9 

2 

Amended.     Proposal  7S4 

3                      

3 

4  (as  am'd  1909) . . . 

4  

Amended.     Proposal  784 

Amended.     Proposal  784 

6 

9  

7  (as  am'd  1913) . . . 

8 

2pt.;3;6 

10  

Repealed.     Proposal  S52 
Amended.     Proposal  845 

9             

11 

10               

12 

11  (added  1905) ...  . 

12  (added  1905) 

6 

Amended.     Proposal  784 

7 

Amended.     Proposal  784 

8 

1 

11 
11 
11 
11 

1 

2 

2 

3 

3 

4 

4 

Doc.  No.  52 


74 


SCHEDULE  B  (Concluded) 
Disposition  of  Sections  of  Constitution  of  1894 


Constitution  of  1894 

Constitution  of  1915 

Article 

Section 

Article 

Section 

Proposal 

8 

5 

G 

7 

8 

11 
11 
11 
11 
11 
11 
11 
11 
11 
11 
11 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10  (as  am'd  1909)... 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

9 

10; 11 

Amended.  Proposal  862 
Amended.     Proposal  827 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

9 

1 

2 

3 

4 

12 

12 
12 
12 

1 

3.  .  . 

4 

10 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

13 
13 
13 
13 
13 
3 
13 
13 
13 

1 

2 

3 

4 

Amended.     Proposal  853 

5 

7 

6   .  .    .  . 

Tr.  by  Proposal  869 

7 

8 

11 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

14 
14 
14 
14 
14 
14 

1 

2 

3 

4 

Amended.  Proposal  761 
Amended.  Proposal  794 
Amended.     Proposal  764 

6. 

6 

12 

1  (as  am'd  1905) . . . 

2  (as  am'd  1907) . . . 
3 

15 
15 
15 

1  pt.;  2 

Amended.     Proposal  851 

4 

5 

Amended.     Proposal  851 

13 

1 

2 

16 
16 

16 
16 
16 
16 

1 

2 

3 

3.  .  . 

4.  .  . 

4 

5 

6 

5 

6     . 

14 

1 

17 
17 

17 

1 

Amended.  Proposal  855 
Amended.  Proposal  855 
Amended.     Proposal  855 

2 

9 

3 

4 

15 

1 

18 

1 

Amended.     Proposal  145 

Note. —  The  amendments  submitted  to  and  adopted  by  the  people  in  1905,  to  Art.  6, 
§  1 ;  Art.  7,  §  11;  and  Art.  12,  §  1,  were  adopted  by  the  Legislature  in  1903.  All  other 
amendments  by  the  people  were  adopted  by  the  Legislature  of  the  same  year  in  which 
they  were  submitted. 


75 


Doc.  No.  52 


SCHEDULE  C 

Sources  of  Sections  of  Constitution  of  1915 


Constitution 
of  1915 

Constitution  of  1894 

Article 

Section 

Article 

Section 

Proposal 

1 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7  (as  am'd  1913) .  .  . 

8 

9 

Amended.     Proposal  870 
Amended.     Proposal  870 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

Amended.     Proposal  799 

16 

17 

18 

19  (as  am'd  1913)  .  .  . 

Amended.     Proposal  865 
Amended.     Proposal  865 

2 

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 

2 
2 
2 
2 
2 
2 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

3 

1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 
21 
22 
23 
24 
25 

3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
10 
3 
3 

"3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 
3 

1 

2 

3 

4 

Amended.     Proposal  869 
Amended.     Proposal  869 

5 

9 

6 

Transferred  by  proposal  869 
Amended.     Proposal  835 
Amended.     Proposal  841 
New.     Proposal  819 
Amended.     Proposal  869 
Amended.     Proposal  861 

6 

10 

S. '.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'. '.'.'.'. 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

Amended.     Prop.  746;  prop.  861 

16 

17 

18  (as  am'd  1901) .  .  . 

19 

20 

Amended.     Proposal  861 
Amended.     Proposal  861 
Amended.     Proposal  854 
Amended.     Proposal  809 

Amended.     Proposal  853 

21 

22 

24 

26  (as  am'd  1899) .  .  . 

Doc.  Xo.  52 


SCHEDULE  C  (Continued) 
Sources  of  Sections  of  Constitution"  of  1915 


Constitution 
of  1915 

Constitution  of  1894 

Article 

Section 

Article 

Section 

Proposal 

3 

26 
27 
28 
29 

3 
3 
3 

27  (as  am'd  1909) .  .  . 

28 

Amended.     Proposal  853 
Amended.     Proposal  800 
Amended.     Proposal  861 
New.     Proposal  864 

29 

4 

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 

4 
4 
4 
4 
4 
4 
4 
4 
4 

1 

Amended.     Proposal  868 

2 

3 

4 

Amended.     Proposal  868 

5 

6 

Amended.     Proposal  846 
Amended.     Proposal  846 

7 

8 

9 

5 

1 

New.     Proposal  809 

6 

1 
2 
3 

4 
5 
6 

7 
8 

"5 

New.     Proposal  863 
New.     Proposal  863 
New.     Proposal  863 
New.     Proposal  863 
New.     Proposal  863 
New.     Proposal  863 
Amended.     Proposal  857 
New.     Proposal  863 

'5.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'. 

7 

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 

'"7 

7 

'"7 

7  pt.  (as  am'd  1913). 
7  pt . .  . 

New.     Proposal  852 
Amended.     Proposal  852 
Proposal  852 
New.     Proposal  852 
New.     Proposal  852 
Proposal  852 

7  pt 

8 

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 

10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 

6 
6 

"o 

6 

"0 
6 
6 
6 
6 
6 
6 
6 
6 
6 
6 

1  (as  am'd  1905) .  .  . 

2  (as  am'd  1905) .  .  . 

3 

Amended.     Proposal  850 
Amended.     Proposal  S50 
New.     Proposal  850 
Amended.     Proposal  850 
Amended.     Proposal  850 

4 

New.     Proposal  850 
Amended.     Proposal  S50 
Amended.     Proposal  850 
Amended.      Proposal  850 

7  (as  am'd  1899) .  .  . 

8   

9 

10 

11.  .  . 

Amended.     Proposal  850 
Amended.     Proposal  850 

12  (as  am'd  1909) .  .  . 
13...                 

11  (as  am'd  1913).  .  . 
15  .  . 

Amended.     Proposal  S50 

16  . . 

17 

Amended.     Proposal  850 

71 


Doc.  No.  52 


SCHEDULE  C  (Continued) 
Sources  of  Sections  of  Constitution  of  1915 


Constitution 
of  1915 

Constitution  of  1894 

Article 

Section 

Article 

Section 

Proposal 

8 

20 
21 

22 
23 
24 
25 

26 

27 
28 
29 

6 

6 
6 
6 
6 
6 

18.. ............... 

19 

20 

21 

New.     Proposal  S50 
New.     Proposal  850 
Amended.     Proposal  850 
Amended.     Proposal  S50 
Amended.     Proposal  850 

22 

23 

Amended.     Proposal  850 
Amended.     Proposal  S50 
New.     Proposal  850 

9 

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 

7 
7 
7 

7 

7 
7 
7 
7 

1 

2 

3 

4  (as  am'd  1909) .  .  . 

5   

Amended.     Proposal  784 

Amended.     Proposal  784 
Amended.     Proposal  784 
Amended.     Proposal  784 
Amended.     Proposal  784 
New.     Proposal  837 

11  (added  1905) 

12  (added  1905) 

6   .  . 

8     . 

Amended.     Proposal  845 

9     . 

10     . 

10 

1 
2 
3 

New.     Proposal  834 
New.     Proposal  834 
New.     Proposal  834 

11 

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 

8 
8 
8 
8 
8 
8 
8 
8 
8 
8 
8 

8 
8 
8 
8 
8 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6   

7 

8  

9 

10  pt.  (as  am'd  1909). 
10  pt 

\l.. ...... ......... 

12   

Amended.     Proposal  862 
Amended.     Proposal  862 
New.     Proposal  862 
Amended.     Proposal  827 

13 

14 

15 

12 

1 
2 
3 

4 

9 
9 
9 
9 

1 

2. 

3 ....  .  .  .  .  .  .  .... 

4 

Doc.  No.  52 


7s 


SCHEDULE  C  (Concluded) 

Sources  of  Sections  of  Constitution  of  1915 


Constitution 
of  1915 

Constitution  of  1891 

Article 

Section 

Article 

Section 

Proposal 

13 

1 

2 
3 
4 
5 
6 
7 
8- 
9 
10 

10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
5 
5 

1 

2 

Amended.     Proposal  853 

3 

4 

5 

7 

8 

9 

8  .  .  . 

9 

14 

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 

11 
11 
11 
11 
11 
11 

1 

2 

3 

4 

Amended.     Proposal  761 
Amended.     Proposal  794 
Amended.     Proposal  764 

5.  .  . 

6 

15 

1 

2 
3 
4 
5 

12 

12 

"l2 
12 

1  pt  (as  am'd  1905) . 
1  pt 

Amended.     Proposal  851 
Amended.     Proposal  851 
New.     Proposal  851 
Amended.     Proposal  851 
Amended.     Proposal  851 

2  (as  am'd' 1907).'.'; 
3 

16 

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 
6 

13 
13 
13 
13 
13 
13 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

17 

1 

2 

3 
4 

14 
14 

14 

1 

2 

3. '.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'. '.'.'.'. 

Amended.     Proposal  855 
Amended.     Proposal  S55 
New.     Proposal  855 
Amended.     Proposal  855 

18 

1 

15 

1 

Amended.     Proposal  145 

September  9,  191; 


Respectfully  submitted, 

AdOLPII   J.    RoDK.XBECK, 

Chairman. 
Lemuel  E.  Quigg, 
William    S.    On tkaxdkk, 
Charles  H.  Betts, 
William  R.  Bates, 
Harry  \Y.  Newburger, 
Timothy  A.  Leary. 

( 'ommittee. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  53 


REPORT  OF  SPECIAL  COMMITTEE  ON  THE  TIME 
AND  MANNER  OF  SUBMISSION  OF  THE  REVISED 
CONSTITUTION 


The  Special  Committee  on  the  Time  and  Manner  of  Submis- 
sion of  the  Revised  Constitution  respectfully  report  the  annexed 
resolution,  and  recommend  its  adoption. 

Herbert  Parsons,   Chairman, 
Elihtt  Root,  ex  officio, 
Jacob  Brenner, 
D.  R.  Cobb, 
Frank  L.  Young, 
DeLancey  Nicoll. 

Dated,  Albany,  September  10,  1915. 


REPORT 


Resolved,  That  the  Kevised  Constitution  adopted  by  this  Con- 
vention be  submitted  to  the  people  for  their  adoption  or  rejection 
at  the  general  election  to  be  held  on  the  2d  day  of  November,  one 
thousand  nine  hundred  and  fifteen,  in  the  manner  following,  that 
is  to  say: 

The  submission  shall  be  in  three  separate  propositions  as  fol- 
lows : 

First — All  of  the  Kevised  Constitution  not  included  in  the 
following  two  propositions. 

Second  —  The  proposed  amendments  to  sections  2,  3,  4  and  5 
of  Article  III  relating  to  legislative  apportionment. 

Third  —  The  proposed  new  Article  X  relating  to  taxation. 

There  shall  be  a  separate  ballot  box  at  each  polling  place  for  the 
reception  of  the  ballots  on  said  propositions. 

Official  ballots  shall  be  provided  at  the  public  expense  at  each 
polling  place.  They  shall  be  endorsed  on  the  back  with  the  words 
"  Revised  Constitution  Ballot,"  On  the  back  of  each  voting  sec- 
tion shall  be  printed  the  number  of  the  question  which  it  contains. 
Except  as  herein  provided  the  ballots  shall  be  in  the  form  pre- 
scribed by  the  Election  Law  for  proposed  constitutional  amend- 
ments and  questions  submitted.  There  shall  be  printed  upon  the 
face  of  each  of  such  official  ballots  three  questions  in  the  following- 
words,  that  is  to  say: 

"  QUESTION  NO.  1 
Revised  Constitution 
Shall  all  of  the  Revised  Constitution  submitted  by  the  Con- 
stitutional  Convention   not   included   in    Questions   2    and   3   be 
approved  ? 

QUESTION  NO.  2 
legislative  Apportionment 
Shall  the  proposed  amendments  submitted  by  the  Constitutional 
Convention  to  Sections  2,  3,  4  and  5  of  Article  III  relating  to 
legislative  apportionment  be  approved  X 


Doc.  Xo.  53  4 

QUESTION  NO.  3 

Taxation 

Shall  the  new  Article  X  submitted  by  the  Constitutional  Con- 
vention relating  to  taxation  be  approved  ?  " 

At  the  left  of  each  question  shall  appear  two  voting  squares, 
one  above  the  other,  each  at  least  one-half  inch  square.  At  the 
left  of  the  upper  square  shall  be  printed  the  word  "  Yes  ",  and  at 
the  left  of  the  lower  square  shall  be  printed  the  word  "  No  ".  On 
the  stub  at  the  top  of  the  ballot  shall  be  printed  the  instructions 
to  the  voter  prescribed  by  Section  332  of  the  Election  Law  as 
follows : 

"INSTRUCTIONS  TO  VOTER: 

1.  To  vote  *  Yes  '  on  any  question  make  a  cross  X  mark  in  the 
square  opposite  the  word  '  Yes  '. 

2.  To  vote  '  Xo  '  make  a  cross  X  mark  in  the  square  opposite 
the  word  ■  Xo  '. 

3.  Mark  only  with  a  pencil  having  black  lead. 

4.  Any  other  mark,  erasure  or  tear  on  the  ballot  renders  it  void. 

5.  If  you  tear,  or  deface,  or  wrongly  mark  this  ballot,  return 
it  and  obtain  another." 

If  a  majority  of  the  electors  voting  on 

"  QUESTION  NO.  1 

Revised  Constitution 

Shall  all  of  the  Revised  Constitution  submitted  by  the  Con- 
stitutional Convention  not  included  in  Questions  2  and  3  be 
approved  ? " 

shall  make  a  cross  mark  in  the  square  opposite  the  word  "  Yes  " 
then  the  proposed  Revised  Constitution  shall  be  the  Constitution 
of  the  State  of  XTew  York,  except  as  the  same  may  be  modified  by 
the  result  of  the  vote  upon  the  second  and  third  questions  above 
specified. 


5  Doc.  No.  53 

If  a  majority  of  the  electors  voting  on 

"  QUESTION  NO.  1 
Revised  Constitution 
Shall  all  of  the  Revised  Constitution  submitted  by  the  Con- 
stitutional   Convention  not   included   in   Questions   2   and   3    be 
approved  ? " 

shall  make  a  cross  mark  in  the  square  opposite  the  word  "  ISTo  " 
then  all  of  the  Revised  Constitution  submitted  by  Question  Xo.  1 
shall  be  declared  rejected,  and  the  present  Constitution  shall 
remain  in  force  except  as  the  same  may  be  modified  by  the 
result  of  the  votes  upon  the  second  and  third  questions  above 
specified. 

If  a  majority  of  the  electors  voting  on 

"  QUESTION  NO.  2 

Legislative  Apportionment 

Shall  the  proposed  amendments  to  Sections  2,  3,  4  and  5  of 
Article  III  relating  to  legislative  apportionment  be  approved  \  " 

shall  make  a  cross  mark  in  the  square  opposite  the  word  "  Yes  ", 
then  the  amended  sections  therein  described  shall  be  Sections  2, 
3,  4  and  5  of  Article  III  of  the  Constitution. 

If  a  majority  of  the  electors  voting  on 

"  QUESTION  NO.  2 

Legislative  Apportionment 

Shall  the  proposed  amendments  to  Sections  2,  3,  4  and  5  of 
Article  III  relating  to  legislative  apportionment  be  approved  ?  " 

shall  make  a  cross  mark  in  the  square  opposite  the  word  "  Xo  ", 
then  the  said  amendments  shall  be  declared  rejected,  and  Sections 
2,  3,  4  and  5  of  Article  III  of  the  present  Constitution  shall* 
remain  in  force  and  effect. 


Doc.  No.   53  6 

If  a  majority  of  the  electors  voting  on 

"  QUESTION  NO.  3 
Taxation 
Shall  the  proposed  new  Article  X  relating  to  taxation  be  ap- 
proved ?  " 

shall  make  a  cross  mark  in  the  square  opposite  the  word  "  Yes  ", 
then  the  proposed  amendment  shall  be  Article  X  of  the  Eevised 
Constitution,  provided,  however,  that  if  that  part  of  the  Eevised 
Constitution  submitted  by  Question  No.  1  be  rejected,  then  the 
said  proposed  amendment  shall  be  Article  Vila  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, and  the  reference  in  Section  2  thereof  to  Section  2  of  Article 
XIII  shall'  be  deemed  to  refer  to  Section  2  of  Article  X  of  the 
present  Constitution,  and  the  said  Article  Vila  shall  be  deemed 
to  be  amended  accordingly. 

If  a  majority  of  the  electors  voting  on 

"  QUESTION  NO.  3 

Taxation 

"  Shall  the  proposed  new  Article  X  relating  to  taxation  be 
approved  ?  " 

shall  make  a  cross  mark  in  the  square  opposite  the  word  "  No  ", 
then  the  said  amendment  shall  be  declared  rejected,  and  if  that 
part  of  the  Revised  Constitution  submitted  by  Question  No.  1  be 
approved,  Articles  XI,  XII,  XIII,  XIV,  XV,  XVI,  XVII  and 
XVIII  of  the  Revised  Constitution  shall  be  Articles  X,  XI,  XII, 
XIII,  XIV,  XV,  XVI  and  XVII  thereof  respectively. 

Chapter  668  of  the  Laws  of  1915  relating  to  the  notice,  dis- 
tribution and  publication  of  amendments  to  the  Constitution  sub- 
mitted by  the  Constitutional  Convention  to  the  people  for  approval 
at  the  general  election  of  1915,  is  hereby  approved  and  made  the 
act  of  this  Convention,  and  the  Secretary  of  State,  the  Attorney- 
General  and  all  other  officers  mentioned  in  said  act  are  hereby 
authorized  and  directed  to  comply  with  the  provisions  thereof. 

But  no  failure  of  notice,  distribution  or  publication  as  therein 
Drovided  .hall  invalidate  or  affed  the  submission  of  the  said  propo 


7  Doc,.  No.  53 

sitions  to  the  people  as  hereinbefore  prescribed  or  the  results  of 
their  action  thereon. 

The  provisions  of  the  Election  Law  in  regard  to  the  counting 
and  canvassing  of  votes  on  proposed  constitutional  amendments 
and  questions  submitted  shall  apply  to  the  counting  and  canvass- 
ing of  votes  on  the  questions  above  specified  except  as  herein 
otherwise  provided. 

The  determination  whether  any  of  the  three  questions  has  re- 
ceived the  number  of  votes  requisite  for  the  adoption  thereof  may 
be  contested  in  the  Supreme  Court  by  any  elector  in  an  action  in 
equity  brought  within  three  months  after  such  election  against  the 
Secretary  of  State  and  the  judgment  rendered  shall  be  reviewable 
by  the  Court  of  Appeals. 


STATE  OF  NEW  YORK 


IN  CONVENTION 


DOCUMENT 

No.  54 


REPORT  OF  SPECIAL  COMMITTEE  TO  PREPARE  AND 
REPORT  A  FORM  OF  ADDRESS  TO  THE  PEOPLE 


To  the  Convention: 

The  Committee  appointed  pursuant  to  resolution  adopted  on 
September  3,  1915,  to  prepare  and  report  to  the  Convention  a 
form  of  address  to  the  people  of  the  State,  beg  leave  to  report  the 
annexed  proposed  address  and  to  recommend  its  adoption  by  the 
Convention. 

Geo.  W.  Wickebsham, 

Chairman. 
Setii   Low, 
A.  T.  Clearwater, 

J.    G.    SCHURMAN, 

Morgan  J.  O'Brien, 
Ledyard  P.  Hale. 

Dated,  Albany,  September  10,  1915. 


ADDRESS  TO  THE  PEOPLE  OF  THE  STATE  OF 
NEW  YORK 


The  Delegates  of  the  People  of  the  State  of  New  York  in  Con- 
vention Assembled  to  revise  and  amend  the  Constitution  of  the 
State  present  to  the  People  a  revised  Constitution  of  eighteen 
articles. 

We  have,  in  the  revised  Constitution  submitted,  retained  the 
general  framework  of  the  existing  Constitution,  and  have  recom- 
mended such  modifications  as  in  our  opinion  are  essential  to  the 
improvement  of  the  government  of  the  State  and  to  remedy  the 
most  striking  deficiencies  of  the  existing  system. 

Besides  striking  out  the  obsolete  matter,  we  have  considered 
upwards  of  800  amendments  proposed,  and  have  adopted  33.  The 
most  important  of  the  amendments  proposed  deal  with : 

1.  The  reorganization  of  the  State  government  on  its  ad- 
ministrative side  into  seventeen  civil  departments,  a  reduction 
in  the  number  of  elected  officers,  and  provisions  for  the  ap- 
pointment of  all  other  officers. 

2.  Provisions  affecting  the  Legislature,  designed  to  remove 
from  it  the  consideration  of  local  matters  and  private  claims, 
and  to  restore  it  to  its  true  function  of  enacting  laws  of 
general  application  and  of  making  necessary  appropriations 
for  the  conduct  of  the  State  government. 

3.  A  careful  regulation  of  and  change  in-  the  method  of 
making  appropriations  for  the  expenses  of  the  State,  by 
means  of  an  annual  executive  budget. 

4.  Improvements  in  the  method  of  contracting  indebted- 
ness for  the  purposes  of  the  State,  and  the  substitution  of 
serial  for  sinking  fund  bonds. 

5.  The  grant  to  cities  of  as  large  a  control  of  their  own 
municipal  government  and  affairs  as  is  consistent  with  State 
sovereignty. 

[3] 


Doc.  No.   54  4 

6.  Authority  in  the  Legislature,  with  the  approval  of  the 
electors  of  such  county,  to  provide  for  any  county  optional 
forms  of  government  and  prohibiting  the  passage  of  local 
or  special  laws  relating  to  a  county,  except  at  the  instance 
of  its  local  authorities. 

7.  Reform  in  civil  procedure  in  the  courts  of  the  State, 
and  provisions  affecting  the  organization  and  jurisdiction  of 
the  courts,  designed  to  prevent  delays  in  the  administration 
of  justice  and  to  simplify  litigation  and  make  it  less  ex- 
pensive. 

8.  State  control  over  the  assessment  of  taxes  on  personal 
and  intangible  property. 

9.  The  protection  of  the  natural  resources  of  the  State 
under  a  conservation  commission. 

10.  Provisions  for  the  benefit  of  wage  earners  by  creat- 
ing a  department  of  labor  and  industry,  by  extending  the 
benefits  of  the  Workmen's  Compensation  Act  to  embrace  oc- 
cupational diseases,  and  by  empowering  the  Legislature  to 
regulate  or  prohibit  manufacturing  in  tenement  houses. 

A  number  of  other  matters  of  only  less  importance  than  those 
abovo  referred  to  also  have  been  embodied  in  the  proposed  amend- 
ments. 

.  I.  The  modifications  we  recommend  in  the  organization  of  the 
executive  department  present  to  the  people  a  plan  for  ending  the 
present  unsystematic,  wasteful  and  irresponsible  State  govern- 
ment, under  which  its  executive  and  administrative  agencies 
are  distributed  among  more  than  one  hundred  and  fifty  bu- 
reaus, departments,  commissions,  boards  and  officials.  Many 
of  these  involve  duplication  of  the  work  of  others.  We  substitute 
for  them  a  concentration  of  all  such  activities  into  seventeen 
departments.  Of  these,  two,  namely,  the  Departments  of  Law 
and  Finance,  are  to  bo  administered  by  the  Attorney-General 
and  the  Comptroller,  respectively;  four,  namely,  the  Depart- 
ments of  Labor  and  Industry,  Public  Utilities,  Conservation, 
and  Civil  Service,  are  under  the  direction  of  commissions  com- 
posed of  one  or  more  commissioners  appointed  for  terms  extend- 
ing beyond  that  of  the  Governor.  They  are  vested  with  both  legis- 
lative and  administrative  functions.     For  these  reasons,  the  con- 


5  Doc.  No.  54 

sent  of  the  Senate  is  required  to  their  appointment  by  the  Gov- 
ernor, and  the j  are  made  removable  by  the  Governor  only  for  cause 
and  after  an  opportunity  to  be  heard.  The  Department  of  Educa- 
tion is  continued  under  the  administration  of  the  University  of 
the  State  of  New  York,  with  powers  to  be  exercised  by  regents 
chosen  by  the  two  houses  of  the  Legislature  voting  jointly  for 
terms  of  nine  years,  one  of  them  expiring  each  year.  Each  of 
the  remaining  ten  departments  is  placed  under  the  direction  of  a 
responsible  head  appointed  and   removable  by  the  Governor. 

We  have  applied  the  principle  of  the  short  ballot,  by  taking  the 
Secretary  of  State  and  the  State  Treasurer  out  of  the  class  of 
elective  officials,  and  abolishing  the  office  of  State  Engineer  and 
Surveyor  and  transferring  his  duties  to  the  Department  of  Public 
Works,  the  head  of  which  is  to  be  appointed  by  the  Governor. 
The  elected  State  officials  will  thus  be  the  Governor  and  Lieutenant- 
Governor,  Attorney-General  and  the  Comptroller,  all  for  the  term 
of  two  years. 

We  have  provided  that  at  the  session  immediately  following  the 
adoption  of  the  Constitution,  the  Legislature  shall  provide  by  law 
for  the  appropriate  assignment  to  and  among  these  seventeen  sev- 
eral departments,  of  all  the  civil  administrative  and  executive  func- 
tions of  the  State  government,  except  those  of  assistants  in  the 
office  of  the  Governor ;  that  no  new  department  shall  hereafter  be 
created,  and  that  any  bureau,  board,  commission  or  office  here- 
after created,  except  assistants  in  the  office  of  the  Governor,  shall 
be  placed  in  one  of  the  departments  so  enumerated. 

The  elective  State  officials  in  office  at  the  time  the  new  Consti- 
tution takes  effect  are  to  continue  in  office  until  the  end  of  their 
respective  terms. 

II.  We  have  extended  the  classes  of  private  or  local  bills 
which  the  Legislature  is  prohibited  from  passing  so  as  to  embrace 
bills  granting  to  any  corporation,  association  or  individual  the 
right  to  prove  a  claim  against  the  State,  or  against  any  civil  divi- 
sion thereof,  and  bills  authorizing  any  civil  division  of  the  State  to 
allow  or  pay  any  claim  or  account.  We  have  forbidden  the 
Legislature  to  audit  or  allow  any  private  claim  or  account  against 
the  State  or  a  civil  division  thereof,  while  authorizing  it  to  pay 
such  claims  and  accounts  against  the  State  as  shall  have  been 
audited  and  allowed  according  to  law.    We  have  provided  that  no 


Doc.  No.   54  6 

public  moneys  or  property  shall  be  appropriated  for  the  construc- 
tion or  improvement  of  any  building,  bridge,  dike,  canal, 
feeder,  waterway,  or  other  work,  until  plans  and  estimates  of  the 
cost  of  such  work  shall  have  been  filed  with  the  Secretary  of  State 
by  the  Superintendent  of  Public  Works,  together  with  a  certificate 
by  him  as  to  whether  or  not  in  his  judgment  the  general  interests 
of  the  State  then  require  that  such  improvements  be  made  at  State 
expense. 

We  have  abolished  the  provisions  for  emergency  messages  by 
the  Governor,  and  have  required  that  no  bill  shall  be  passed  or 
become  a  law  unless  it  shall  have  been  printed  and  upon  the  desks 
of  the  members  in  its  final  form  at  least  three  calendar  legislative 
days  prior  to  its  final  passage. 

We  have  required  each  house  of  the  Legislature  not  only  to 
keep  a  complete  journal  of  its  proceedings,  but  also  a  record  of  its 
debates,  and  promptly  to  publish  the  same  from  day  to  day. 

The  salary  of  members  of  the  Legislature  was  fixed  at  $1,500 
per  annum  in  1875.  In  view  of  the  changes  in  the  value  of  money 
and  the  largely  increased  cost  of  living  during  the  forty  years  since 
that  date,  we  have  increased  that  compensation  to  $2,500  a  year, 
besides  the  actual  railroad  fare  of  the  members  paid  in  going  to 
and  returning  from  their  homes  not  oftener  than  once  a  week  dur- 
ing the  session  of  the  Legislature.  An  additional  reason  for  this 
increase  was  furnished  by  the  argument,  earnestly  pressed  upon 
us,  that  many  competent  and  desirable  citizens  cannot  afford  to  be- 
come members  of  the  Legislature  at  the  present  rate  of  compensa- 
tion. We  have  also  increased  the  salary  of  the  Governor,  after 
January  1,  1917,  to  $20,000  a  year,  as  more  suitable  to  the  dignity 
and  responsibility  of  the  office  of  Chief  Executive  of  the  State. 

III.  We  have  proposed  a  radical  change  in  the  method  of  pro- 
viding for  the  necessary  expenditures  of  the  State.  Instead  of 
leaving  the  Legislature  to  make  appropriations  without  any  com- 
prehensive and  systematic  study  of  the  needs  of  the  various  de- 
partments of  the  State  government,  and  the  sources  of  its  revenue, 
leaving  to  the  Governor  the  power  and  duty  after  the  adjournment 
of  the  Legislature  to  go  over  the  appropriation  bills  and  cut  out 
items  which  appear  to  him  to  be  unnecessary  or  improper,  we  have 
sought  to  restore  the  true  American  ideal  which  accords  with  the 


7  Doc.  No.   54 

genius  and  history  of  our  institutions,  by  requiring  the  preparation 
by  the  heads  of  departments  in  advance  of  each  legislative  session 
of  itemized  estimates  of  appropriations  to  meet  the  financial  needs 
of  each  department  for  the  ensuing  year,  and  the  preparation  by 
the  Governor,  after  public  hearing,  for  submission  to  the  Legisla- 
ture, of  a  complete  budget  or  plan  of  proposed  expenditures  and 
estimated  revenues.  We  give  to  the  Governor  and  the  heads  of 
the  departments  the  right  to  appear  before  the  Legislature  and  be 
heard  respecting  the  budget,  and  make  it  their  duty  so  to  appear 
if  requested  by  either  house.  We  give  to  the  Legislature  the 
power  to  reduce  or  eliminate,  but  not  to  increase  any  item  in 
such  proposed  budget.  The  appropriation  bills  enacted  after  this 
procedure  are  to  become  laws  without  the  Governor's  approval. 
Appropriations  for  the  expenses  of  the  judiciary  and  the  Legis- 
lature are  left  subject  to  the  Governor's  veto  power  as  at  present. 
We  have  sought  by  these  provisions  to  substitute  responsible  for 
irresponsible  government;  appropriations  based  upon  thorough  in- 
vestigation, comprehensive  information,  and  in  the  light  of  in- 
formed public  discussion  followed  by  deliberate  action  in  the 
early  period  of  the  legislative  session,  for  the  present  complex, 
irresponsible  system  of  legislation,  often  by  secret  conference 
in  committee  and  hurried  enactment  with  the  aid  of  emergency 
messages  in  the  closing  hours  of  the  session.  We  believe  that 
these  provisions  must  lead  to  the  elimination  of  many  useless  or 
improvident  expenditures,  and  result  in  a  greater  economy  in  the 
administration  of  the  State  finances. 

IV.  We  have  also  recommended  provisions  changing  the  present 
cumbersome,  uncertain  and  costly  system  of  providing  sinking 
funds  for  the  retirement  of  bonds  issued  by  the  State,  by  requiring 
all  bonds  of  the  State  to  be  issued  in  serials  not  extending  beyond 
the  estimated  life  of  the  work  or  improvement  for  which  the 
debt  is  contracted,  payable  in  equal  annual  installments,  and 
therefore  requiring  no  sinking  funds. 

V.  We  have  proposed  as  large  a  measure  of  Home  Rule  for 
the  cities  of  the  State  as  is  consistent  with  the  recognition  and  re- 
tention of  the  sovereignty  of  the  State.  We  provide  that  every 
city  shall  have  the  exclusive  power  to  manage,  regulate  and 
control  its  own  property,  affairs  and  municipal  government. 
Such  power    shall   include,   among  others,  the  right  to  organize 


Doc.  No.   54  8 

and  manage  the  departments  of  the  city  government,  and 
to  regulate  the  compensation  and  method  of  removal  of  all 
city  officers  and  employees,  thus  enabling  them  to  obtain 
what  is  just  and  fair,  both  for  themselves  and  the  taxpayers, 
without  the  necessity  in  the  first  instance  of  application  to  the 
State  Legislature.  As  a  last  resort,  or  as  a  matter  of  State  policy, 
the  Legislature  retains  power  to  redress  just  grievances  by  the  enact- 
ment of  laws  applicable  to  all  the  cities  of  the  State  without  classi- 
fication or  distinction.  We  make  it  the  duty  of  the  Legislature  by 
general  laws  to  provide  for  the  organization  of  new  cities  in  such 
manner  as  to  secure  to  them  the  exercise  of  powers  thus  granted. 
We  provide  a  method  for  the  adoption  by  existing  cities  of  new 
charters  for  the  exercise  of  such  powers,  which  charters  must 
be  submitted  to  the  Legislature  and  become  effective  if  not  disap- 
proved by  it.  Among  the  powers  so  granted  is  that  of  adopting 
amendments  to  charters ;  but  amendments  which  change  the  frame- 
work of  the  city  government,  or  modify  restrictions  as  to  issuing 
bonds  or  contracting  debts,  must  be  submitted  to  the  Legislature, 
and  shall  take  effect  as  law  sixty  days  after  such  submission,  unless 
in  the  mean  time  the  Legislature  shall  disapprove  the  same  by  joint 
resolution.  We  prohibit  the  Legislature  from  passing  any  law  re- 
lating to  the  property,  affairs  or  municipal  government  of  a  city, 
except  such  as  is  applicable  to  all  the  cities  of  the  State  without 
classification  or  distinction,  and  we  empower  the  Legislature  to 
delegate  to  the  cities,  for  exercise  within  their  respective  local 
jurisdictions,  such  of  its  powers  of  legislation  as  to  matters  of 
State  concern  as  it  may  from  time  to  time  deem  expedient.  We 
also  require  the  Legislature  to  provide  for  the  method  and  limita- 
tions under  which  debts  may  be  contracted  by  the  cities,  counties, 
towns,  villages  and  other  civil  divisions  of  the  State,  to  the  end 
that  such  debts  shall  be  payable  in  annual  instalments,  the  last 
of  which  shall  fall  due  and  be  paid  within  fifty  years  after  such 
debts  shall  have  been  contracted,  and  in  no  event  for  a  period 
longer  than  the  probable  life  of  the  work  or  object  for  which  it  is 
to  be  contracted. 

VI.  We  authorize  the  Legislature  by  general  law  to  establish 
different  forms  of  government  for  any  county  not  wholly  included 
within  a  city,  to  become  effective  only  when  approved  by  the 
electors  of  the  county,  and  to  confer  upon  any  elective  or  appoint- 


9  Doc.  No.  54 

iVe  county  officer  or  officers  any  of  the  powers  and  duties  now 
exercised  by  the  towns  in  any  county,  or  by  any  officer  of  a  town, 
relating  to  highways,  public  safety  and  the  care  of  the  poor. 
We  have  provided  that  no  local  or  special  law  relating  to  a  county 
or  counties,  except  those  wholly  included  within  a  city,  shall  be 
enacted,  except  upon  request  by  resolution  of  the  governing  body 
of  the  county  or  counties  to  be  affected.  We  have  also  authorized 
the  Legislature  by  general  laws  to  confer  upon  the  boards  of  super- 
visors or  other  governing  bodies  of  the  several  counties  of  the 
State  such  further  powers  of  local  legislation  and  administration 
as  the  legislature  may  from  time  to  time  deem  expedient. 

VII.  We  have  sought  to  remove  the  basis  for  complaints  of  de- 
lays and  undue  expense  in  the  administration  of  justice,  by 
amendments  dealing  with  (1)  rules  of  procedure,  and  (2)  the 
organization  and  jurisdiction  of  courts  and  judges.  As  to  the 
first,  we  require  the  Legislature  to  enact  at  its  next  session  a 
short  and  simple  civil  practice  act  which  it  may  not  alter  or 
!amend,  unless  at  the  request  of  the  judges  empowered  to  frame 
civil  practice  rules,  except  at  intervals  of  five  years,  and  then 
only  after  report  by  a  commission  appointed  to  consider  the  sub- 
ject. We  give  to  the  judges  of  the  Court  of  Appeals  and  Supreme 
Court  exclusive  power  to  make  rules  of  court  to  regulate  details 
of  civil  practice.  By  these  provisions  we  not  only  do  away  with 
the  confused  and  complicated  mass  of  statutes  which  constitute 
the  Code  of  Civil  Procedure,  but  we  substitute  for  a  rigid  statu- 
tory regulation  of  practice  rules  of  court  made  to  facilitate  the 
progress  of  litigation  without  undue  technicalities  and  delays. 
(2)  We  recommend  an  increase  in  the  number  of  justices  com- 
posing the  Appellate  Division  of  the  Supreme  Court  in  the  first 
department  from  seven  to  not  less  than  ten  nor  more  than  twelve, 
and  in  the  second  department  from  five  to  seven.  To  supply  this 
enlarged  force,  provision  is  made  for  the  election  of  two  new 
justices  in  the  first  district.  In  1914,  the  Appellate  Division  in 
the  first  department  disposed  of  1,500  appeals  and  840  motions, 
more  than  double  that  of  any  other  court  in  the  State,  except  the 
Appellate  Division  in  the  second  department,  which  in  1914  de- 
cided about  70  per  cent,  of  that  number.  The  changes  in  organi- 
zation and  increase  in  the  number  of  justices  recommended  is 
essential  to  cope  with  this  great  volume  of  business. 


Doc.  No.  54  10 

The  number  of  cases  undisposed  of  in  the  Court  of  Appeals  has 
been  steadily  increasing.  It  requires  more  than  two  years  after 
appeal  taken  to  that  court  before  a  case  not  entitled  to  preference 
can  be  reached  for  argument.  There  are  now  more  than 
600  cases  pending  before  it.  We  recommend  that  the 
number  of  permanently  elected  judges  be  increased  to  ten, 
and  that  the  three  Supreme  Court  justices  now  sitting  in 
the  Court  of  Appeals  by  designation  of  tho  Governor  be  continued 
as  associate  judges  of  tho  court  until  the  expiration  of  their  re- 
spective terms,  after  which  their  successors  shall  be  elected  as 
associate  judges  of  the  Court  of  Appeals.  For  the  purpose  of  dis- 
posing of  the  present  accumulation  of  business,  we  require  the 
Court  of  Appeals  within  three  months  after  the  Constitution  takes 
effect,  to  designate  for  temporary  service  in  that  court  not  less 
than  four  nor  more  than  six  justices  of  the  Supreme  Court, 
and  thereupon  to  divide  the  Court  of  Appeals  into  two  parts  each 
of  seven  judges,  each  part  having  equal  jurisdiction  to  hear  and 
dispose  of  the  cases  which  shall  be  distributed  between  them  by 
the  chief  judge.  When  the  accumulation  of  cases  has  been  re- 
duced to  100,  but  not  later  than  December  31,  1917,  the  Supreme 
Court  justices  are  to  return  to  their  court  and  the  Court  of 
Appeals  is  then  to  resume  its  normal  condition  as  a  single  court. 
Similar  provisions  are  made  to  deal  with  accumulations  of  cases 
in  the  future. 

In  order  to  facilitate  impeachment  of  officers  of  the  State  in 
proper  cases,  we  have  provided  that  the  Legislature,  of  its  own 
motion,  may  convene  to  take  action  in  the  matter  of  the  removal 
of  a  judge  of  tho  Court  of  Appeals  or  justice  of  the  Supreme 
Court;  that  the  Assembly,  of  its  own  motion,  may  convene  for  the 
purposes  of  impeachment,  and  that  the  court  for  the  trial  of  im- 
peachments may  order  nil  or  any  part  of  the  testimony  in  any 
case  to  be  taken  and  reported  by  a  committee  composed  of  mem- 
bers of  the  court,  except  that  the  impeached  officer  must  be  al- 
lowed to  testify  before  the  court  if  ho  so  desire.  Applying  the 
principle  that  no  man  shall  serve  as  judge  in  a  cause-  in  the  out- 
come of  which  he  has  a  personal  interest,  Ave  provide  that  on  the 
trial  of  an  impeachment  of  the  Governor  or  Lieutenant-Governor, 
neither  I  lie  Lieutenant-Governor  nor  the  Temporary  President  of 
the  Semite  shall  act  as  a  member  of  the  court 


11  Doc.  No.  r>! 

We  have  provided  for  the  appointment  by  the  Appellate  Divi- 
sions in  the  first  and  second  departments  of  Supreme  Court  Com- 
missioners to  act  as  referees  or  to  determine  the  compensation  to 
be  paid  when  private  property  is  taken  for  a  public  use,  and  to 
perform  such  other  duties  as  may  be  devolved  upon  them  by  special 
order,  rule  of  court  or  the  civil  practice  rules. 

We  have  increased  the  jurisdiction  of  county  courts  in  common 
law  actions  for  the  recovery  of  money  only  from  $2,000  to  $3,000, 
and  we  have  authorized  the  Legislature  to  confer  upon  them  juris- 
diction over  actions  against  non-residents  having  an  office  for  the 
regular  transaction  of  business  within  the  county  when  the  cause 
of  action  arises  within  the  county. 

Recognizing  the  greatly  increased  efficiency  which  has  been 
realized  by  the  consolidation  of  numerous  small  courts  into  single 
tribunals  so  organized  that  their  entire  judicial  force  may  be  kept 
occupied  by  the  distribution  of  the  business  within  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  the  court  among  its  various  terms  and  parts,  we  have 
provided  for  the  extension  from  and  after  January  1,  1917,  over 
the  whole  city  of  New  York,  of  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Court  of 
General  Sessions  in  and  for  the  city  and  county  of  New  York,  the 
abolition  of  the  county  courts  of  Kings,  Queens,  Richmond  and 
Bronx  and  the  transfer  to  the  Court  of  General  Sessions  of  the 
criminal  jurisdiction  of  those  courts.  We  have  also  provided  for 
the  extension  from  and  after  January  1,  1917,  over  the  whole  city 
of  the  jurisdiction  of  the  City  Court  of  the  city  of  New  York, 
the  transfer  to  it  of  the  civil  jurisdiction  of  the  county  courts  of 
Kings,  Queens,  Richmond  and  Bronx,  and  the  increase  of  its 
jurisdiction  in  common  law  actions  for  the  recovery  of  money 
only  to  $3,000. 

In  order  to  obviate  delays  in  criminal  cases  Ave  have  author- 
thorized  the  Legislature  to  confer  upon  any  inferior  local 
court  power  to  try  without  a  jury  offenses  of  the  grade  of 
misdemeanor.  We  have  provided  that  any  person  may,  in  the 
manner  prescribed  by  law,  after  examination  or  commitment  by 
a  magistrate,  waive  indictment  and  trial  by  jury  on  a  charge  of 
felony  punishable  by  not  exceeding  five  years  imprisonment,  or 
of  an  indictable  misdemeanor,  all  subsequent  proceedings  being 
had  by  information  before  a  superior  court  of  criminal  jurisdie- 


Doc.  No.  54  12 

tion,  or  a  judge  or  justice  thereof.  This  will  remove  a  source  of 
serious  complaint  in  those  counties  where  there  is  sometimes  a 
period  of  three  and  four  months  between  grand  juries,  so  that  a 
person  charged  with  crime,  even  if  willing  to  plead  guilty,  must 
be  held  on  bail,  or  kept  in  prison,  until  the  next  session  of  the 
grand  jury,  in  order  that  the  formality  of  indictment  may  be  ob- 
served before  his  plea  can  be  received.  We  have  provided 
that  in  any  criminal  case  the  party  accused  shall  have  the  right 
to  at  least  one  appeal.  We  have  also  provided  that  every  person 
shall  be  entitled  to  the  equal  protection  of  the  laws. 

To  enable  the  Legislature  to  deal  with  delinquent  children, 
not  as  criminals,  but  as  wrards  of  the  State,  and  to  regulate  do- 
mestic relations  on  a  broader  basis  than  the  mere  enforcement  of 
penal  laws,  we  have  empowered  the  Legislature  to  establish 
children's  courts  and  courts  of  domestic  relations,  as  separate 
courts  or  parts  of  existing  courts  or  courts  hereafter  created,  and 
to  confer  upon  them  such  equity  and  other  jurisdiction  as  may  be 
necessary  for  the  correction,  protection,  guardianship  and  dis- 
position of  delinquent,  neglected  or  dependent  minors,  and  for  the 
punishment  of  adults  responsible  therefor,  and  of  all  persons 
legally  chargeable  with  the  support  of  wife  or  children  who  have 
abandoned  or  neglected  to  support  either. 

To  prevent  the  constant  partisan  political  legislation  affecting 
the  court  of  claims,  we  have  continued  that  court  as  a  constitu- 
tional tribunal,  with  appropriate  jurisdiction  for  the  hearing  and 
determination  of  claims  against  the  State. 

VIII.  We  recommend  the  adoption  of  a  new  article  respecting 
taxation,  which  empowers  the  Legislature  to  prescribe  how  taxable 
subjects  shall  be  assessed,  and  to  provide  for  officers  to  execute 
laws  relating  to  the  assessment  and  collection  of  taxes,  and  for  the 
supervision,  review  and  equalization  of  assessments.  We  provide 
that  the  power  of  taxation  shall  never  be  surrendered,  suspended 
or  contracted  away,  except  as  to  securities  of  the  State  or  a  civil 
division  thereof,  and  that  hereafter  no  exemption  from  taxation 
shall  be  granted,  except  by  general  laws  and  upon  an  affirmative 
vote  of  two-thirds  of  all  the  members  elected  to  each  house. 

We  recommend  provisions  under  which  the  Legislature  for  the 
assessment  of  real  property  heretofore  locally  assessed  may,  with 


13  Doc.  No.  54 

the  approval  of  the  electors,  establish  tax  districts  embracing  one 
county  or  any  part  thereof,  and  make  the  assessment  roll  for  such 
district  serve  for  all  the  lesser  tax  districts  within  its  boundaries, 
thus  providing  a  uniform  rule  of  assessment  for  all  purposes 
throughout  the  county  or  district. 

IX.  We  have  provided  for  a  department  of  conservation,  to 
consist  of  nine  commissioners  to  serve  without  compensation  and 
to  be  appointed  for  terms  to  expire  in  nine  successive  years,  their 
successors  to  be  appointed  for  terms  of  nine  years  each,  one  of 
whom  shall  reside  in  each  judicial  district.  This  department  is 
charged  with  the  development  and  protection  of  the  natural  re- 
sources of  the  State,  the  encouragement  of  forestry  and  the  sup- 
pression of  forest  fires  throughout  the  State,  the  exclusive  care, 
maintenance  and  administration  of  the  forest  preserve,  the  con- 
servation, prevention  of  pollution  and  regulation  of  the  waters  of 
the  State,  the  protection  and  propagation  of  its  fish,  birds,  game, 
shell-fish  and  Crustacea,  except  migratory  fish  of  the  sea  within  the 
limits  of  the  marine  district.  We  continue  the  provision  that  the 
forest  preserve  shall  be  forever  kept  as  wild  forest  lands.  We 
require  the  Legislature  annually  to  make  provision  for  the  pur- 
chase of  real  property  within  the  Adirondack  and  Catskill  parks, 
the  reforestation  of  lands  and  the  making  of  boundary  and  valua- 
tion surveys,  and  we  provide  that  the  violation  of  any  of  the  pro- 
visions of  the  article  dealing  with  conservation  may  be  restrained 
at  the  suit  of  the  people,  or  of  any  citizen. 

X.  We  have  recognized  the  needs  of  the  wage  earning  class  of 
our  people;  (1)  by  creating  the  Department  of  Labor  and  In- 
dustry as  one  of  the  civil  departments  of  the  State  government,  at 
the  head  of  which  is  to  be  an  Industrial  Commission  or  Com- 
missioner as  may  be  provided  by  law;  (2)  by  including  in  the 
amended  constitution  the  provisions  of  the  Workmen's  Compen- 
sation amendment  adopted  in  1913,  and  extending  its  provisions 
so  as  to  embrace  compensation  for  injury  or  death  resulting  from 
occupational  diseases  of  employees,  and  (3)  by  conferring  upon 
the  Legislature  power  to  regulate  or  prohibit  manufacturing  in 
tenement  houses. 

XL  We  have  extended  the  existing  constitutional  prohibition 
against  the  sale,  lease  or  other  disposition  of  the  Erie  and  other 


Doc.  No.  54  14 

canals  so  as  to  embrace  canal  terminals  heretofore  or  hereafter 
constructed,  and  we  have  provided  that  the  abandonment,  sale  or 
other  disposition  of  canals  or  canal  property  which  shall  cease  to 
be  a  portion  of  the  canal  system  of  the  State,  shall  be  only  under 
and  pursuant  to  general  laws  which  shall  secure  to  the  State  a 
fair  appraised  value  of  the  property  abandoned  or  sold.  We  pro- 
vide that  the  Legislature  by  general,  not  special  laws,  may  provide 
for  the  lease  of  surplus  waters  of  the  State  canals. 

XII.  We  have  continued  with  but  slight  changes  the  provisions 
of  the  existing  Constitution  respecting  the  composition  of  the 
Senate  and  Assembly,  and  the  reapportionment  of  their  members 
according  to  the  number  of  inhabitants  of  the  State,  exclusive  of 
aliens.  We  provide  that  such  reapportionment,  after  the  year 
191 G,  shall  be  based  upon  the  Federal  census,  unless  the  same  shall 
not  be  available ;  and,  in  conformity  with  the  home  rule  principle 
in  its  application  to  counties,  we  provide  that  in  any  city  em- 
bracing an  entire  county,  or  more  than  one  county,  and  having  no 
board  of  supervisors,  the  members  elected  from  such  county  to  the 
board  of  aldermen,  or  other  body  most  nearly  exercising  the  powers 
of  the  board  of  aldermen,  shall  meet  and  divide  such  county  into 
assembly  districts  according  to  the  rule  prescribed  by  the  Con- 
stitution. 

XIII.  We  leave  unchanged  the  provisions  in  the  present  Consti- 
tution requiring  the  State  to  provide  for  the  maintenance  and  sup- 
port of  a  system  of  free  common  schools  wherein  all  the  children  of 
the  State  may  be  educated,  and  forbidding  the  use  of  the  property, 
credit  or  money  of  the  State  directly  or  indirectly  for  the  aid  or 
maintenance  of  any  school  or  institution  wholly  or  in  part  under 
the  control  or  direction  of  any  religious  denomination. 

XIV.  We  have  not  deemed  it  expedient  to  recommend  provisions 
making  more  difficult  the  adoption  of  amendments  to  the  Constitu- 
tion ;  but  in  order  that  the  attention  of  the  public  may  be  directed 
to  any  attempts  at  amendment,  we  have  provided  that  in  ease  any 
proposed  amendment  to  the  Constitution  shall  be  adopted  by  either 
house  of  the  Legislature,  on  the  first  Tuesday  following  such 
adoption,  the  two  houses  shall  convene  in  joint  session  for  the  con- 
sideration thereof,  and  that  thereafter  the  proposal  shall  be  con- 
sidered and  acted  upon  by  the  two  houses  separately,  and  that  such 


15  Due.  No.  54 

proposal  shall  not  be  passed  until  after  it  shall  have  been  printed 
and  upon  the  desks  of  the  members  in  its  final  form  for  at  least 
five  calendar  legislative  days  prior  to  final  action. 

XV.  Other  provisions  not  herein  specifically  enumerated  have 
been  adopted  by  us  as  desirable  amendments  to  the  existing  Con- 
stitution. We  earnestly  recommend  all  of  these  proposals  to  the 
favorable  consideration  of  the  electors  of  the  State,  believing  that 
their  adoption  will  result  in  a  very  great  improvement  in  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  State  and  its  civil  divisions,  and  thus  promote  the 
welfare  of  all  of  its  inhabitants. 

Adopted  in  Convention,  September  10,  1915. 

ELIII1T  ROOT, 

President  and  Delegate  at  Large. 

WILLIAM  D.  CUNNINGHAM, 

Secretary. 


INDEX  TO  DOCUMENTS 


INDEX  TO   DOCUMENTS 


A  Nos. 

Amendment,  Substitute  for  No.  752,  Int.  Xo.  699,  in  relation  to  right  of 

electors  to  select  candidates  for  office 29 

Angell,  E.  M.,  Minority  report  in  relation  to  conservation 28 

Answer,  State  Comptroller  in  relation  to  sinking  funds  of  the  State  of 

New  York 18 

Appeals,  Court  of: 

Eeply  of,  to  resolution  of  the  convention  in  relation  to  number  of  cases 

on    appeal    8 

Opinion  of,  in  relation  to  Workmen's  Compensation  Law 19 

Attorney-General,  Reply  of,  to  resolution  of  the  convention  in  relation  to 

the   Court   of  Claims 16 

Austin,  H.  Leroy,  Minority  report  in  relation  to  conservation 28 

B 

Baldwin,  A.  J.,  Minority  report  in  relation  to  short  ballot 40 

Ballot,  Short: 

Address  of  Frank  J.  Goodnow  on   short  ballot 13 

Address  of  A.  Lawrence  Lowell  on  short  ballot 14 

Address  of  Elihu  Root  on  short  ballot 50 

Address  of  William  Howard  Taft  on  short  ballot 11 

Majority  report  of  Committee  on  Governor  and  other  State  Officers 

in   relation   to   short   ballot 40 

Minority  reports  of  Committee  on  Governor  and  other  State  Officers 

in  relation  to  a  short  ballot 40,  41 

Bill   of   Rights,    Minority   report   on,    in   relation   to  capital    punishment. 

(For  majority  report  see  amendment  No.  870,   Int.  No.  720.) 48 

Blauvelt,  G.  A.,  Minority  report  in  relation  to  a  short  ballot 41 

Bockes,  G.  L.,  Minority  report  in  relation  to  a  short  ballot 41 

Brackett,  E.  T.,  Minority  report  in  relation  to  increase  in  salaries  of  mem- 
bers of  the  Legislature 20 

Budget  system  for  the  state: 

Address  of  John  J.  Fitzgerald  on  budget  system 15 

Address  of  Frank  J.  Goodnow  on  budget  system 13 

Address  of  A.  Lawrence   Lowell   on   budget    system 14 

Address  of  William  Howard  Taft  on  budget  system 11 

Report  of  the  Committee  on  State  Finances,  Revenues  and  Expendi- 
tures relative  to  a  budget  system 32 

Minority  report  by  Mr.  Wagner  in  relation  to  a  budget  system 35 

Bunce,  G.  A.,  Minority  report  in  relation  to  the  bill  of  rights 48 

Burkan,  Nathan,  Minority  report  in  relation  to  reapportionment 46 

23 


4  Index  to  Documents 

C  Nos. 

Canals,  Report  of  the  Committee  on  Canals,  in  relation  to  all  questions 

submitted  in  relation  thereto 33 

Capital  Punishment,  Minority  report  on.     (For  majority  report  see  amend- 
ment No.  870,  Int.  No.  720. ) 48 

Charities,  Report  of  the  Committee  on  Charities  recommending  no  change 

in  the  present  method  of  government 34 

Cities: 

Report  of  the  Committee  on  Cities,  in  relation  to  several  proposed 

amendments  relative  to  home  rule  for  cities  and  villages 36 

Minority  report  in  relation  to  home  rule  for  cities  and  villages,  by 

Mr.  Foley  and  Mr.   Franchot 36 

Civil  Service: 

Committee  on  Civil  Service  reports  adversely  on  any  change  in 
present  language  of  the  constitution  and  adversely  on  several  pro- 
posed amendments   47 

Minority  report  recommending  certain  changes  in  the  present  lan- 
guage of  the  constitution  in  respect  to  civil  service  by  Mr.  Mann, 

Mr.  Weed,  Mr.  Dunmore,  Mr.  Unger  and  Mr.  Richards 47 

Clinton,  George,  Sr.,  Report  on  Canals 33 

Commission : 

Report  of  the  Constitutional  Convention  Commission  on  its  work  to 

date,  May   19,   1915 6 

Supplemental  report  of  Constitutional  Convention  Commission 7 

Final  report  of  Constitutional  Convention  Commission 45 

Committee  Assignments,  All  of,  for  the  Constitutional  Convention 1 

Compensation  and  expenses  of  members  of  the  Legislature 20 

Comptroller : 

Reply  to  resolution  of  convention  on  state  sinking  funds 18 

Report  in  relation  to  salary  and  compensation  received  by  the  several 

county  treasurers   9 

Conservation : 

Report  of  the  Committee  on  Conservation  of  Natural  Resources,  creat- 
ing a  new  article  in  relation  thereto 28 

Minority  report  from  the  Committee  on  Conservation  by  Mr.  Angell, 
Mr.  Landreth,  Mr.  Meigs,  Mr.  Whipple  and  Mr.  Austin,  dissenting 

from  portions  of  new  article 28 

Constitutional  Convention : 

Assignment  of  members  to  committees 1 

Names  and  post-office  addresses  of  delegates 2 

Constitution : 

Report  of  the  Committee  on  Revision  and  Engrossment  with  amend- 
ments to  the  present  constitution 51 

Report  by  the  Committee  on  Revision  and  Engrossment  of  the  present 
constitution    with    amendments    properly    inserted    as    adopted    by 

the  convention  of  1915 52 

Report  of  Special  Committee  on  time  and  manner  of  submission  of 
the  revised  constitution    53 


Index  to  Documents  5 

Courts:  Nos- 

Abolishing  Indian  Tribal  Courts 26 

Opinion  of  the  Court  of  Appeals  on  Workmen's  Compensation  Law.  .  19 
Reply  of  Clerk  of  Court  of  Appeals  in  relation  to  number  of  cases  on 

appeal    ° 

Report  of  the  Committee  on  Judiciary  in  relation  to  all  courts  of  the 

state 42 

Reply  of  the  Attorney-General  to  resolution  of  the  convention  in  re- 
lation to  the  Court  of  Claims 16 

Counties,  Report  of  Comptroller  on  treasurers  of 9 

D 

Debts  contracted  by  the  state,  Report  of  Finance  Committee  on 23 

Delegates,  Names  and  post-office  addresses  of 2 

Dow,  Charles  M.,  Report  as  Chairman  of  Committee  on  Conservation ....  28 
Dunmore,  W.  T.: 

Minority  report  on  civil  service  article 47 

Minority  report  on  judiciary  article 42 

E 

Elections: 

Right  of  electors  to  select  candidates  for  office 29 

Short  ballot,  for  election  of  state  officers 40 

Short  ballot,  minority   report    on    40,  41 

Woman  Suffrage,  Resolution  on 5 

F 
.finances: 

Address  by  John  J.  Fitzgerald  on  budget  system 15 

Address  by  Frank  J.   Goodnow  on  budget  system 13 

Address  by  A.   Lawrence   Lowell   on  budget   system 14 

Address  by  William  Howard  Taft  on  budget  system 11 

Committee  on   State  Finances  report  remedy  of  abuses  in  appropria- 
tion of  public  money  for  local  uses 44 

Committee  on  State  Finances  report  in  relation  to  a  budget  system 

for  the  state 32 

Committee  on  State  Finances  report  in  relation  to  debts  contracted 

by  the   state 23 

Minority  report  on  budget  system  by  Mr.  Wagner 35 

Minority  report  on  debts  contracted  by  state  by  Mr.  Wagner 23 

Fitzgerald,  J.  J.,  Address  by,  on  state  budget  system 15 

Foley,  J.  A.,  Minority  report  on  cities,  home  rule 36 

Ford,  L.  H.,  Minority  report  on  legislative  organization 20 

Franchot,  E.  E.,  Minority  report  on  cities,  home  rule 36 

G 

Goodnow,  F.  J.,  Address  by,  in  relation  to  budget  system  and  short  ballot.  13 
Governor,  Lieutenant,  and  Acting  Governor,  reply  of,  to  resolution  of  the 

convention,  relating  to  prisoners  and  pardons 12 


6  Index  to  Documents 

Governor  and  State  Officers:  Nos. 

Committee  on   Governor  and   other   State   Officers  report  on  several 

proposed  amendments  and  recommend  a  short  ballot 40 

Minority  reports  by  Mr.  Baldwin,  Mr.  Blauvelt  and  Mr.  C.  Xicoll,  dis- 
senting from  committee  report  on  short  ballot 40,  41 

Address  by  Frank  J.  Goodnow  on  short  ballot 13 

Address  by  A.  Lawrence  Lowell  on  short  ballot 14 

Address  by  William  Howard  Taft  on  short  ballot 11 

Guthrie,  W.  D.,  Address  by,  in  relation  to  suffrage 37 

H 

Hale,  L.  P.,  Report  as  Chairman  of  Committee  on  Public  Utilities 25 

Herrick,  D-Cady,  Address  by,  in  relation  to  suffrage 37 

Home  rule  for  cities  and  villages,  report  on 36 

Hospitals,   Charities   Committee   report   on,   recommending  no   change   in 

present  form  of  government 34 


Indians,  Report  of  Committee  on  Relations  to  the  Indians  and  recommend- 
ing that  tribal  courts  be  abolished 26 

Industrial  Interests  and  Relations: 

Report  of  the  Committee  on  Industrial  Interests  and  Relations  in  re- 
lation to  matters  affecting  employees,  manufacturing  in  dwellings, 

child   labor,   etc 24 

Report  of  the  Committee  on  Industrial  Interests  and  Relations  in  re- 
gard to  damages  for  injuries  causing  death,  laws  for  the  protec- 
tion of  the  lives,  health  or  safety  of  employees,  and  workmen's  com- 
pensation for  injuries  or  death,  from  accidents  or  occupational  dis- 
eases       38 

Minority  reports  by  Mr.  Leggett,  dissenting  from  the  reports  of  the 

Committee  on  Industrial  Interests  and  Relations 30,  31,  39 

Insane,  Charities  Committee  report  on,  recommending  no  change  in  present 
form  of  government 34 

J 

Judiciary: 

Report  of  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary  relative  to  the  proposed 
amended   judiciary  article 42 

Minority  report  by  Mr.  Dunmore  on  the  proposed  amended  judiciary 
article 42 

Address  by  President  Elihu  Root  on  the  proposed  amended  judiciary 
article 43 


Kirby,  Thomas  A.: 

Minority  report  dissenting  from  the  report  of  the  Committee  on  Pub- 
lic Utilities,  relative  to  salaries  of  Public  Service  Commissioners, 
Second  District   25 

Minority  report  against  increase  in  salary  of  members  of  the  Legis- 
islature 20 


Index  to  Documents  7 

L  Nos. 

Labor,  Memorial  from  State  Federation  recommending  certain  amendments 

to  the  constitution  17 

Landreth,  0.  H.,  Minority  report  in  relation  to  conservation 28 

Latson,  A.  R.,  Report  of,  as  Chairman  on  Military  Affairs 49 

Leggett,  J.  C,  Minority  reports  in  relation  to  industries  and  em- 
ployees   30,  31,  39 

Legislature,  its  organization,  etc.: 

Report  of  the  Committee  on  the  Legislature,   its  organization,  etc., 

in  relation  to  raising  the  salaries  of  members  of  the  Legislature.      20 
Minority   report  by  Mr.  Brackett,   Mr.   Quigg,   Mr.   Kirby,   and   Mr. 
Ford,  dissenting  from  the  report  of  the  Committee  in  relation  to 
the  proposed  increase  in  salaries  of  members  of  the  Legislature .  .      20 
Minority  report  by  Mr.  A.  E.  Smith  and  Mr.  Burkan,  in  relation  to 
representation  of  New  York  City  in  the  Legislature  and  in  respect 

to  home  rule 46 

Legislative  Powers,  Report  of  the  Committee  on  Legislative  Powers  and 
Limitations,  in  relation  to  power  to  license  and  regulate  certain  voca- 
tions  ■ 22 

Lieutenant-Governor,   Reply  of   the   Lieutenant-Governor,   acting  as  Gov- 
ernor, to  resolution  of  the  convention,  relative  to  prisoners  and  pardons     12 
Lindsay,  J.  P.,  Presents  the  report  of  the  Committee  on  Legislature,  its 

organization,  etc 20 

Low,  Seth,  Report  as  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Cities,  by  amend- 
ment on  self-government  for  cities  and  villages 36 

Lowell,  A.  Lawrence,  Address  by,  on  budget  system  and  short  ballot 14 

M 

Mann,  Frank,  Minority  report  in  relation  to  civil  service 47 

Martin,  Francis,  Minority  report  in  relation  to  bill  of  rights 48 

Meigs,  F.  J.,  Minority  report  in  relation  to  conservation 28 

Memorials: 

New  York  State  Federation  of  Labor,  recommending  several  amend- 
ments to  the  constitution 17 

Society  of  Tammany  or  Columbian  Order,  in  relation  to  trials,  judges 

and    legislative    representation 27 

Militia  and  Military  Affairs,  Report  of  Committee  on,  makes  no  changes 

in    present    constitution 49 

Minority  Reports: 

Minority  report  on  bill  of  rights  by  Mr.  M.  J.  O'Brien,  Mr.  Schur- 

man,  Mr.  Bunco,  Mr.  Reeves,  and  Mr.  Martin 4S 

Minority  report  on  proposed  budget  system  by  Mr.  Wagner 35 

Minority  report  on  cities  by  Mr.  Foley  and  Mr.  Franchot 36 

Minority  reports  on  civil  service  by  Mr.  Mann,  Mr.  Weed,  Mr.  Dun- 
more,  Mr.  Unger  and  Mr.   Richards 47 

Minority  report  on  conservation   by   Mr.  Angell,  Mr.   Landreth,   Mr. 

Meigs,  Mr.  Whipple  and  Mr.  Austin 28 

Minority  report  on  debts  contracted  by  the  state,  by  Mr.  Wagner.  ...      23 
Minority  report  on  industries  and  employees,  by  Mr.  Leggett..30,  31,  39 


8  Index  to  Documents 

Minority  Reports  —  continued :  Nos. 

Minority  report  on  the  judiciary  article,  by  Mr.  Dunmore 42 

Minority  report  on  reapportionment,  by  Mr.  A.  E.  Smith  and  Mr.  Bur- 

kan 46 

Minority  report  on  salaries  of  members  of  the  Legislature,  by  Mr. 

Brackett,  Mr.  Quigg,  Mr.  Kirby  and  Mr.  Ford 20 

Minority  report  on  salaries  of  Public  Service  Commissioners,  Second 

District,  by  Mr.  Kirby 25 

Minority  report  on  short  ballot,  by  Mr.  C.  Nicoll,  Mr.  Baldwin,  Mr. 

Blauvelt  and  Mr.  Bockes 41 

N 
Nicoll,  C,  Minority  report  in  relation  to  short  ballot 40 

O 

O'Brien,  M.  J.: 

Substitute  amendment  in  relation  to  right  of  electors  to  select  can- 
didates      29 

Minority  report  in  relation  to  bill  of  rights 48 

Opinion,  by  Court  of  Appeals  on  Workmen's  Compensation  Law 19 

P 

Pardons,  Reply  of  Acting  Governor  Schoeneck  to  resolution  of  the  con- 
vention in  relation  thereto 12 

Parsons,  Herbert: 

Report  as  chairman  of  the  Committee   on   Industrial   Interests  and 

Relations    24,  38 

Resolution  in  relation  to  woman  suffrage 5 

Printing  Board,  State,  Report  by 4 

Public  Utilities,  Report  of  Committee  on  Public  Utilities  by  amendment 

relating  to  Public  Service  Commissions 25 

Minority  report  relating  to  salaries  of  Public  Service  Commissioners, 
Second  District,  by  Mr.  Kirby 25 

0 

Quigg,  L.  E.,  Minority  report  in  relation  to  salaries  of  members  of  the 
Legislature 20 

R 

Reapportionment : 

Memorial  by  the  Society  of  Tammany  or  Columbian  Order  in  relation 

to   reapportionment    27 

Minority  report  in  relation  to  reapportionment  by  Mr.  A.  E.  Smith 

and  Mr.  Burkan 46 

Reeves,  A.  G.,  Minority  report  in  relation  to  bill  of  rights 48 

Replies: 

Attorney-General   to   resolution  of  the  convention  in  relation  to  the 

Court  of  Claims 16 

Clerk  of  the  Court  of  Appeals  to  resolution  of  the  convention  relating 

to  cases  on  appeal 8 

Comptroller  of  the  State  to  resolution  of  the  convention  relating  to 
county  treasurers   9 


Index  to  Documents  9 

Replies  —  continued:  Nos. 

Comptroller  of  the  State  to  resolution  of  the  convention  relating  to 

sinking  funds  of   the   state 18 

Lieutenant-Governor  and  Acting  Governor  to  resolution  of  the  con- 
vention relating  to  prisoners  and  pardons 12 

Reports: 

Committees  on: 

Bill  of  Rights,  Minority  report  in  relation  to  capital  punishment. 

(For  majority  report  see  amendment  No.  720,  Pr.  No.  870.)  .  .      48 
Canals,  By  amendment  Int.  No.  710,   in  relation  to  all  matters 

submitted  connected  with  canals 33 

Charities,  Recommending  no  change  in  the  present  form  of  gov- 
ernment   of    34 

Cities,  In  relation  to  home  rule  for  cities  and  villages 36 

Civil  Service,  Recommending  no  change  in  the  language  of  the 

present  constitution  relating  to  civil  service 47 

Conservation,   Recommending   an   entire  new   article   in   relation 

to  conservation  of  natural   resources 28 

Finances  and  Expenditures,  Recommending  a  budget  system  for 

the  state,  and  in  relation  to  debts  contracted  by  the  state. 23,  32,  44 
Governor  and  Other  State  Officers,  On  several  proposed  amend- 
ments and  recommend  a   short   ballot 40 

Industrial  Interests  and  Relations,  In  regard  to  matters  affect- 
ing  employees,   workmen's   compensation,   etc 24,  38 

Indians,  Recommending  that  Indian  Tribal  Courts  be  abolished.      26 
Legislature,   its   Organization,   etc.,   In   relation   to   salaries   and 

expenses  of  members  of  the  Legislature 20 

Legislative  Powers,  In  relation  to  license  and  to  regulate  certain 

vocations    22 

Militia  and  Military,  Recommends  no  change  in  present  consti- 
tution          49 

Public  Utilities,  In  relation  to  Public  Service  Commissions.  ...      25 
Revision   and   Engrossment,  In  relation  to  all  proposed  amend- 
ments and  the  constitution  with  all  amendments 51-52 

Rules,   Of   the   Constitutional   Convention,   including   all   amend- 
ments    3,   10,  21 

Special   Committee,   On  time   and  manner   of   submission   of  the 

revised    constitution    53 

Special  Committee,  To  prepare  and  report  a  form  of  address  to 

tlic  people  on  tbe  revised  constitution 54 

Reports,  other  than  committees: 

Constitutional  Convention  Commission 6,  7,  45 

State  Printing  Board    4 

Resolution,   In   regard   to   woman    suffrage 5 

Rhees  Rush,  Report  as  Chairman  of  Civil  Service  Committee 47 

Richards,  E.  L.,  Minority  report  on   civil   service 47 

Rights,   Bill  of,  Minority   report  on,   in   relation   to  capital   punishment. 

(For  majority  report  see  amendment  No.  S70,  Int.  No.  720) 48 

Rodenbeck,  A.  J.,  Report   as  Chairman  of  Committee   on  Revision    and 
Engrossment,  on  revised  constitution 51,  52 


10  Index  to  Documents 

Eoot,  Elihu,  President:  Xos. 

Address    of,    in    Committee   of    the    Whole,    relative   to   the    proposed 

amended    judiciary    article    43 

Address  of,  in  Committee  of  the  Whole,  on  the  short  ballot  amend- 
ment          50 

Rules,  Of  the  Constitutional  Convention,  including  all  amendments.  .  3,   10,  2l 

S 
Salaries: 

Report  on,  in  relation  to  members  of  the  Legislature 20 

Report  on,  in  relation  to  Public  Service  Commissioners 25 

Schoeneck,    Edward,    Lieutenant-Governor    and    Acting    Governor,    reply 

of,  relating  to  prisoners  and  pardons 12 

Schurman,  J.  G.,  Minority  report  in  relation  to  bill  of  rights 48 

Short    Ballot,    Report   on   by    Committee   on    Governor    and   other    State 

Officers 40 

Sinking  Fund,  Answer  of  State  Comptroller  to  resolution  of  the  conven- 
tion relating  to  sinking  funds IS 

Smith,  A.  E.,  Minority  report  relating  to  reapportionment 46 

Stimson,  H.  L.,  Report  by  as  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  State  Fi- 
nances, Revenues  and  Expenditures 23,  32,  44 

Suffrage : 

Address  by  D-Cady  Herrick  in  relation  to  suffrage 37 

Address  by  William  D.  Guthrie  in  relation  to  suffrage 37 

Address  by  George  W.  Wickersham  relating  to  suffrage 37 

Amendment  offered  by  Mr.  M.  J.  O'Brien  in  relation  to  the  right  of 

electors  to  select  candidates  for  office 29 

Resolution  by  Mr.  Parsons  in  regard  to  woman  suffrage 5 

Short   Ballot,   for   election   of   state   officers,   majority   and   minority 
reports  on   40,  41 

T 

Taft,  William  Howard,  Address  by,  on  state  budget  system  and  short 
ballot   11 

Tammany  Society  of,  Memorial  from  in  relation  to  trials,  judges  and 
legislative  representation 27 

Tanner,  F.  G,  Report  by,  as  Chairman  of  the  Committee  mi  Governor  and 
Other  State  Officers  relating  to  short  ballot 40 

U 
LTnger,  A.  B.,  Minority  report  by,  relating  to  civil  service 47 

W 

Wadsworth,  J.  W.,  Report  by,  as  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Charities, 
recommending  no  change    in    present  constitution 34 

Wagner,  Robert,  Minority  reports  by,  in  relation  to  a  budget  system  and 
to  state  debts   35,  23 

Weed,  .1.  W.,  Minority  report  by,  relating  to  civil  service 47 

Whipple,  J.  S.,  Minority  report  by,  in  relation  to  conservation  of  natural 
resources  28 


Index  to  Documents  11 

Wickersham,  George  W.:  Nos. 

Address  by,  in  relation  to  suffrage 37 

Report  by,  as  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary,  relative 

to  the  proposed  judiciary  article 42 

Report  by,  as  Chairman  of  the  Special  Committee  to  prepare  and 
report  a  form  of  address  to  the  people  relating  to  the  revised  con- 
stitution      54 

Woman  Suffrage,  Resolution  in  regard  to 5 

Woodbury,  E.  E.,  Attorney-General,  Reply  to  resolution  of  the  convention 

relating  to  Court  of  Claims 16 

Workmen's  Compensation,  Opinion  on  by  Court  of  Appeals 19 


J\j    oo^ou 


